12.5The Committee recalls that it is not its role to review the interpretation of facts and national law made by domestic authorities, unless the decisions were manifestly arbitrary or otherwise amounted to a denial of justice. Nevertheless, the Committee has to examine whether the statements made by Mr. Sarrazin fall within any of the categories of impugned speech set out in article 4, of the Convention, and if so, whether those statements are protected by the “due regard” provision as it relates to freedom of speech, as well as to whether the decision not to prosecute Mr. Sarrazin was manifestly arbitrary or amounted to a denial of justice. 12.6The Committee has taken note of the content of Mr. Sarrazin’s statements regarding the Turkish population of Berlin and in particular notes that he states that a large proportion of the Turkish population does not have any productive function except for the fruit and vegetable trade, that they are neither able nor willing to integrate into German society and encourage a collective mentality that is aggressive and ancestral. Mr. Sarrazin uses attributes such as productivity, intelligence and integration to characterize the Turkish population and other immigrant groups. While he uses these attributes in a positive manner for some immigrant groups, for example the East European Jews, he uses them in a negative sense for the Turkish population. He states that the Turks are conquering Germany just as the Kosovars conquered Kosovo: through a higher birth rate, and that he would not mind if they were East European Jews with an IQ about 15 per cent higher than that of the Germans. Mr. Sarrazin states that he does not have to accept anybody who lives off the State and rejects that very State, who makes no effort to reasonably educate their children and constantly produces new little headscarf girls, and claims that this is true for 70 per cent of the Turkish population in Berlin. Mr. Sarrazin also creates an adjective to express his ideas concerning the inferiority of the Turkish population and states that in other segments of the population, including Germans “one can see a “Turkish” problem”. He also states that he would generally prohibit influx of migrants, except for highly qualified individuals and stop providing social welfare for immigrants. The Committee considers that the above statements contain ideas of racial superiority, denying respect as human beings and depicting generalized negative characteristics of the Turkish population, as well as incitement to racial discrimination in order to deny them access to social welfare and speaking about a general prohibition of immigration influx except for highly qualified individuals, within the meaning of article 4 of the Convention. 12.7Having described Mr. Sarrazin’s statements as impugned speech under article 4 of the Convention, the Committee needs to examine whether the State party properly assessed these statements as being protected by the “due regard” provision relating to freedom of speech. The Committee recalls its jurisprudence and reiterates that the exercise of the right to freedom of expression carries special duties and responsibilities, in particular the obligation not to disseminate racist ideas. It also observes that article 4 of the Convention codifies the State party’s responsibility to protect the population against incitement to racial hatred but also acts of racial discrimination by dissemination of ideas based upon racial superiority or hatred. 12.8While acknowledging the importance of freedom of expression, the Committee considers that Mr. Sarrazin’s statements amounted to dissemination of ideas based upon