BUDAPEST PROCESS B U D A P E S T P R O C E S S

BUDAPEST PROCESS BUDAPEST PROCESS

Assessment of state of play and the way forward 2010

Table of Content
1. Background ...................................................................................................................................................... 2
2. Stocktaking of the Budapest Process .............................................................................................................. 2

2.1 Unique framework for cooperation ................................................................................................................ 2
2.2 Present structure ........................................................................................................................................... 2
3. Considerations for change ............................................................................................................................... 3
4. Proposed Working Group structure of the Budapest Process ......................................................................... 4
4.1 Geographic: (Three Working Groups) ........................................................................................................... 4
4.2 Thematic: (One Working Group) ................................................................................................................... 4

1

1. Background

In 2009 the Secretariat of the Budapest Process, in cooperation with the Chair, Turkey, initiated a process of
revision of the management of the Budapest Process aimed, on the one hand, at gathering suggestions from
participating states regarding the strategic direction of the Budapest Process, and on the other hand, advancing
the administration and financial security of the Secretariat. This revision process was reviewed on 9 September
2009 when the meeting of the Friends of the Chair (FOC) of the Budapest Process1, serving as the advisory
board to the Chair in all matters related to the strategic orientation of the Process, was held in Vienna, chaired
by Turkey.

After the FOC the Chair initiated a follow-up process on ministerial level, asking participating countries to clarify
their commitments and priorities to the Budapest Process in 2010. Furthermore, the Chair has been working
with the Secretariat on proposals to implement the conclusions from the FOC, to streamline the framework of
the Budapest Process and to vitalise the strategic focus.

In this process, the key benefits and characteristics of the Budapest Process should be considered as well as
the need to find synergies and avoid overlaps with other relevant initiatives operating within the Eurasian
sphere. This paper attempts to in section 2) to take stock on the advantages of the Budapest Process describe
its’ present structure and to present the considerations for change in 3) and finally in section 4) illustrate the
proposed new structure.

2. Stocktaking of the Budapest Process

2.1 Unique framework for cooperation

The Budapest Process offers a unique framework for cooperation in comparison to other dialogues and projects:

• The Budapest Process is the only intergovernmental dialogue for the Eurasian region that is not purely
project funded. This gives the Budapest Process flexibility which brings important benefits as it can react
and adapt quickly to new developments in migration patterns, specific needs of the participating states and
current events. Project funded activities are inherently bound by a more rigid project plan and fixed
deliverables.

• The Budapest Process is managed outside the institutional framework of the EU which underlines equality
between all participating states and its independence.

• The Budapest Process provides an established network to the East. There are no real alternatives to
keeping this network on a structured and durable basis.

• Budapest Process meetings are tailor-made to the specific needs of states, focus on specific relevant
problems rather than general issues, and can therefore offer real added value in terms of results.

• Established in the early nineties, the Budapest Process has become a credible framework for
cooperation, especially on expert level, among a wide range of states and organisations with accepted
basic principles and working methods. Informality, flexibility, use of non-binding recommendations and
participation on equal level by all states (EU and non-EU) are principles that have become synonym with its
name.

• Meetings are open, constructive and concrete and participants keep to the topic at hand and avoid disputes
over political issues.

• The established Budapest Process secretariat function is remarkably slim, cheap and resource-efficient.

2.2 Present structure

There are presently seven Working Groups. Meeting intensity and quality of participation differ between the
working groups. For some of the working groups, meetings gather many participants on relevant level and for
others meeting have not been held regularly and interest is tepid.

The following thematic and geographic working groups are currently active:

• Working Group on Irregular Movements and Asylum (tenth meeting, April 2008, Prague), chaired by the
Czech Republic

1 The meeting gathered representatives of main donor States of the Budapest Process, as well as the leading/hosting countries for the
Working Groups: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Georgia, Hungary, Moldova, the
Netherlands, Poland, Switzerland, Slovakia, the United Kingdom as well as the European Commission.

2

• Working Group on Return and Readmission (sixth meeting, September 2008, Warsaw), chaired by the
United Kingdom and Poland

• Working Group on Immigration and Admission Policies (third meeting, June 2008, Budapest), chaired by
Hungary and Slovakia

• Working Group on the Development of Migration Management Systems (second meeting, May 2007,
Tbilisi), chaired by Bulgaria and Moldova

• Working group on the Approximation of Penalty Scales for smuggling of migrants and trafficking of
human beings, (third meeting, May 2006, Yerevan), chaired by Belgium

• Working Group on the South East European Region (second meeting under Croatian chairmanship (10th
in total), September 2009, Zagreb), chaired by Croatia

• Working Group on the Black Sea Region (first meeting, November 2008, Sofia), chaired by Bulgaria.

3. Considerations for change

According to the strategic advice provided by the FOC, the Process should retain its thematic focus on (i)
prevention and fight against irregular migration, (ii) return and readmission and (iii) asylum. In addition to this, it
is a priority to provide for co-operation on labour migration as well as on sustainable return and links between
return and development. Geographically, the Budapest Process should in addition to its present coverage seek
active co-operation with other countries along the migration routes.

It is suggested to consolidate and streamline the working group structure to be able to concentrate resources on
key topics and regions and therefore to put a main focus in the working group structure on priority regions
and migration routes. A pro-active consultation process with the secretariats of other relevant initiatives
operating within the Eurasian sphere will be initiated to avoid overlaps of events and topics covered. Three
main priority areas, where the Budapest Process framework presently offers an added value to these other
initiatives are South East Europe, the Black Sea Region and the countries beyond the Black Sea Region i.e.
following the historic silk routes.

It is therefore proposed to retain the Working Group on Return and Readmission and the two presently active
geographic working groups – the Working Group on the South East European Region and the Working
Group on the Black Sea Region. In addition, a new Working Group on the “Silk Routes Region” should
explore ways for cooperation with additional countries along the migration routes.

Within the three suggested geographic areas, thematic
issues of special importance to the process will
continuously be discussed such as 1) Irregular
migration - analysis of routes, statistics, counter
measures, border management cooperation as well as
document security etc. 2) Asylum - information
exchange on asylum issues and sharing of asylum
statistics etc. 3) Regional dimensions of return and
readmission and 4) Legal migration - labour
migration flows and conditions, integration and
development aspects. The new geographic working
groups will thus build on the results of the former
thematic working groups.

Horizontal aspects are also of importance in the
proposed structure of the Budapest Process. Firstly,
with a view to the wider objective of furthering genuine
dialogue and partnerships between countries of
origin, transit and destination the Budapest Process
can provide a strong contribution. It has in particular been recognised as an important framework proving
implementation support to the EU Global Approach to Migration to the East and South East regions.2

2 Communication by the European Commission of 16 May 2007, “Applying the Global Approach to Migration to the Eastern and South-
Eastern Regions Neighbouring the European Union", and Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council,
the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions strengthening the global approach to migration:
increasing coordination, coherence and synergies”, published in June 2008 and adopted on 8 October 2008.

3

Furthermore, the Budapest Process framework could, in close coordination with relevant follow-up initiatives,
support the implementation of specific elements of the Joint Declaration adopted at the Ministerial Conference
“Building Migration Partnerships (BMP)”. Strong cooperation with other processes working in this and other
regions, such as the Mediterranean Transit Migration (MTM) Dialogue, the Söderköping Process and the Bali
Process, also contributes to the objective of furthering dialogue and partnerships.

Secondly, data collection and analysis is already an important part of the work of the Budapest Process, partly
through the data collection carried out in preparation of various working group meetings, partly through
supporting yearly publications such as the ICMPD Yearbook on Illegal Migration, Human Smuggling and
Trafficking in Central and Eastern Europe. Taking a horizontal approach towards the handling of collected data,
improving the storing, sharing and accessibility would bring further benefits to the Budapest Process countries.
In this respect the Interactive Map on Migration (i-Map), developed within the framework of the MTM should be
mentioned. This tool, which has strong potential for data sharing and analysis, is presently also being developed
regarding the Eastern migration routes under the EU co-funded project Building Migration Partnerships (BMP).

4. Proposed Working Group structure of the Budapest Process

4.1 Geographic: (Three Working Groups)

The Working Group on the South East European Region is chaired by
Croatia and aims at providing a framework for increased cooperation and
information exchange with and between the countries of the South East
Europe, to contribute to the continuous development of migration systems in
the region and to ultimately foster the EU approximation of the region.

The Working Group on the Black Sea
Region is chaired by Bulgaria and aims at
providing a framework for exchange of
expertise and practices in a wide range of topics relevant for the region, to
encourage knowledge transfer on migration management with and between
the countries of the Black Sea region and to encourage cooperation in the
region giving equal importance to the situation of countries of origin, transit or
destination.

A new Working Group on the “Silk Routes Region” is proposed to extend
these two WGs. Geographically, this working group should cover cooperation with Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq,

Pakistan and Syria (if successful, countries further east along the
silk routes such as China and India could be included at a later
stage).The Chair of the Budapest Process, Turkey, has offered to
take the lead and has proposed the following to initiate its work:

As a first step the diplomatic and consular network of Turkey will be
used to inform of the initiative. With the support of the Secretariat, a
background document will be developed giving the history, basis
and founding principles of the Budapest Process cooperation, as
well as the relevance for the inclusion of these major countries of
origin and transit to the Process. It is proposed to hold the first meeting of this Working Group jointly with the
Budapest Process Senior Officials meeting in November 2010.

4.2 Thematic: (One Working Group)

Working Group on Return and Readmission

This working group is presently chaired by Poland and UK and its objectives are to contribute to the
development of sound return policies all over the regions covered by the Process through providing a framework
for discussion and information sharing among experts on a technical level and in an informal setting on return
and readmission and by facilitating dialogue on an equal footing between countries of origin, transit and
destination. It is the most popular working group and it has a rich agenda for the future – the next working group
meeting will probably, in light of the conclusions of the last FOC meeting, deal with reintegration and sustainable
return. It is suggested that this working group remains, both regarding scope and content.

4