Consideration of admissibility 11.1Before considering any claim contained in a communication, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination must decide, pursuant to article 14, paragraph 7 (a), of the Convention, whether or not the communication is admissible. 11.2The Committee notes that the petitioner is a legal entity. It is an umbrella association with individual members and 27 legal entities as members. The Committee takes note of the State party’s argument that the communication should be declared inadmissible, on grounds of “lack of victim standing” in accordance with article 14, paragraph 1, as the petitioner is not directly affected by the statements of Mr. Sarrazin. It also notes the State party’s claim that the present communication cannot be compared to communication No. 38/2008, because in the present case, the petitioner does not have the authority to speak for the group it represents and has not provided any arguments as to why it is acting on behalf of its members without due authorization. It also takes note of the petitioner’s argument that it represents the interests of citizens of Turkish heritage in Berlin and that its work of promoting equality and a climate of non-discrimination was directly affected by the statements of Mr. Sarrazin. 11.3The Committee reiterates that article 14, paragraph 1, directly refers to the Committee’s competence to receive communications from “groups of individuals”. It considers that, on the one hand, the nature of the petitioner’s activities and its aims, which are, according to paragraph 3 of its by-laws, the promotion of peaceful coexistence and solidarity in Berlin and Brandenburg and the furtherance of equality and nondiscrimination implemented, inter alia, by counselling and support both in and out of court against discrimination, and, on the other hand, the group of individuals it represents, namely persons of Turkish heritage in Berlin and Brandenburg, satisfies the victim requirement within the meaning of article 14, paragraph 1, of the Convention. It further considers that for purposes of admissibility, the petitioner has sufficiently substantiated that it was directly affected by Mr. Sarrazin’s statements, as it had received several e-mails in which individuals expressed their agreement with Mr. Sarrazin, stating that citizens of Turkish heritage and Muslim do not integrate and that the petitioner should accept the supremacy of freedom of expression. It also received a notification from the police that it was on the list of the National Socialist Underground as an enemy of Germany. 11.4The Committee therefore considers that the fact that the petitioner is a legal entity is not an obstacle to admissibility. Accordingly, the Committee declares the communication admissible and proceeds with its examination on the merits with regard to the claims under articles 2, paragraph 1 (d), 4, paragraph (a) and 6, of the Convention. Consideration of the merits 12.1In accordance with article 14, paragraph 7 (a), of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Committee has considered the present communication in light of all the information submitted by the petitioner and the State party.