“Be careful with this visa application” warns the algorithm
The NRC of 23 April contains an article about the processing of applications for Schengen visas and mentions some objections and pitfalls about how the Ministry of Foreign Affairs processes applications for a Schengen short-stay visa.
The entire article can be read on the website of the NRC, see here: https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2023/04/23/beslisambtenarenblijven-profileren-met-risicoscores-a4162837
In summary, the following points are noted:
- The visa department uses algorithms, the so-called “Information Supported Decision Making” (IOB). This so that, based on, for example, the travel history of the individual as well as general characteristics (nationality, gender, age), the official is advised whether the visa can simply be issued or whether the application needs to be checked additionally.
- According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, this will speed up the processing process, otherwise there would be many more civil servants, while the number of visa applications has risen sharply in recent years and the number of civil servants has actually decreased (due to cutbacks).
- That is why the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has opted for outsourcing (the visa applications must be submitted via the external service provider VFS Global), centralization (all decision-making officials work from The Hague instead of at the embassies) and automation (digital sending of documents, the IOB algorithm that advises gives).
- Digitization has led to, among other things, poorer accessibility/contact and many complaints.
- The advice of the internal supervisor to stop using profiling software has been disregarded by the Minister of BuZa.
Personal explanation (Rob V.):
If you are interested in the visa procedures, I advise you to read the article yourself. There was nothing new in it for me personally. The fact that applications are already rising year on year, while the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has to make do with fewer civil servants and therefore wants to work more efficiently (more digital, outsource more and lay the bill for this with the citizen) is not news to me. It is also known that there are too few staff at both the VFS and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and that the queues have therefore increased. 118 decision officials on (normally) around 700.000 applications per year is not a healthy or sustainable situation. Unfortunately, the journalist does not point to the regulations in which the maximum waiting times and processing times are laid down. I would have liked to read more about the regularity with which these are exceeded, what Ministry of Foreign Affairs intends to do about this and within what period. Now several pain/risk points are discussed very briefly. Delving deeper into specific points will, I think, be "too deep" for many journalists and readers who say little else about this, so I don't count on the NRC taking the subject to the next level.
I can say very little about the algorithm, which indicates a risk score on the basis of which the civil servant can look more or less intensively at the application. More work has to be done with fewer people and a visa is therefore already a matter of minutes. Someone who has used a visa properly before is clearly worth a less intensive (thus faster) look than, for example, a first application. To what extent is it correct to assign a risk figure purely to the fact that you are, for example, a Thai woman? Well, each application must be judged on its own merits, but a civil servant will also be influenced by his own experience and, like everyone else, will also have unconscious prejudices. Properly arranged, a computer can actually counteract such a prejudice, but there have also been plenty of times when an algorithm actually seemed to maintain prejudices.
I would like to endorse the fact that the service and experience of citizens/travellers has deteriorated considerably over the past decade. The personal contact, which is so nice when you are lost as a citizen, especially when you are dealing with a procedure or situation for the first time, should be highly regarded by me. But if the election results indicate that the civil service could do with a little less … go for it.
How is it possible if you give money to a certain person that you do get permission, and if you don't give money you don't get permission either? We did a test with 5 people who paid extra, and all got permission, and another 4 who did not pay, no permission, how is that possible?
Giving money to whom? Not to officials of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs? To VFS, the document collector who has no decision-making authority whatsoever?
Please substantiate a little more, this 'crying' is of little use to us.
My Thai partner submitted her documents to VFS on April 5 for a tourist visa for the Netherlands (and Schengen countries). On Friday, April 21, she received her passport including visa back.
However, to our great surprise, she received a visa for a stay of 15 days. It was the 11th time she applied for and received a visa.
The previous visas she received always had a maximum stay of 3 months.
Which, according to the websites of the Dutch embassy, is also the normal length of stay for a tourist visa. It is not a problem because she had stated on the application form that she wanted to go to the Netherlands for 15 days.
Some embassies try to get out of the facilitating visa by simply not accepting your visa application with a deliberate delay, even though VFS initially accepts the application after their own checks. They use your specified combination of family visits / tourism to send you to the NL embassy, even though your own specified main goal is most days in another EU country. Tip: always use tourism as a travel destination. A certain kind of people work there that if the bureaucracy allows it, you want to make life more difficult and know that the road to objection is long. So you just have to work around that. They know they cannot refuse a facilitating visa, so don't process it if you can. Sad people there. That EU freedom to travel is half set up anyway.
The only positive that VFS should offer, but the Dutch embassy apparently does not WANT to use, is the higher number of canters. Also in Thailand. But for some reason you have to be in Thailand in Bangkok for a Dutch visa, while many other embassies also use VFS in Chiang Mai, Phuket, etc. How does this work? Do you pay for 'VFS service' (which, by the way, adds all kinds of extra paid services, sometimes unsolicited), but hardly experience any service? Digitization is also a mockery. One would expect that everything should now be possible online (apart from fingerprints, which should simply be done at numerous service offices OR upon entering Schiphol). But one wants to maintain all sorts of random bumps.
to VFS Global, a Dubai-based multinational company owned by US investment fund Blackstone.
“Stop profiling visa applicants to distinguish them partly on the basis of nationality and then treat them unequally on the basis of that distinction.”
“The judgment is that the system is 'lawful', 'proportional' and 'non-discriminatory'. The privacy officer's call is overruled. The man no longer works at the department.”
In any case, it is crazy that a commercial party can decide on so many visa applications from so many countries. A position of power for a company in eventually Dubai.
VFS Global decides absolutely nothing. Is a box pusher nothing more and nothing less. They collect the documents, check them and forward the Schengen visa application to the CSO in The Hague. The decision-making staff of the CSO receive the files from the external service provider and make an assessment based on the file.
VFS Global is an international company that specializes in providing visa and consular services for many countries, including Schengen countries. The role of VFS Global in the Schengen visa application process can be summarized as follows:
Provision of information: VFS Global provides information on the visa requirements, documentation and procedures for applying for a Schengen visa for different countries. This information is usually available on their website and through their customer service.
Appointment system: VFS Global operates an online appointment system that allows applicants to make an appointment to submit their visa application at a VFS Global center or an embassy/consulate.
To file a request: Applicants can submit their Schengen visa application at a VFS Global center. VFS Global collects the necessary documents, checks that all required information is present and accepts the visa fee on behalf of the embassy or consulate.
Biometric data: VFS Global collects the biometric data (fingerprints and photo) of the applicant, if required, and forwards them along with the application documents to the appropriate embassy or consulate.
Request Processing: VFS Global acts as an intermediary between the applicant and the embassy/consulate and forwards the application to the embassy or consulate for review and decision-making.
Return of passports: After the Embassy or Consulate has made a decision on the visa application, VFS Global will return the passport with the visa (if approved) or an explanatory letter (if rejected) back to the applicant. Applicants can collect their passport from the VFS Global center or choose to have it delivered by courier.
It is important to note that VFS Global has no influence on the visa application decision itself. This decision is taken exclusively by the embassy or consulate of the relevant Schengen country.
“In any case, it is crazy that a commercial party can decide on so many visa applications from so many countries. A position of power for a company in eventually Dubai.”
I know VFS doesn't decide. Used wrong word by fast fast. Should be “Involved in” and “access to personal info”. But VFS can express their own opinion and I know from experience that employees are sometimes not even aware of certain rules and think they can send you away with excuse x.