was no indication that Mr. Sarrazin intended to incite hatred against certain segments of the population. His statement was neither objectively suitable nor subjectively determined to engender and strengthen an emotionally increased hostile attitude against people of Turkish and Arab origin, nor did it include any indication that violent or arbitrary measures should be used against those groups. Hatred based on intolerance was not incited, promoted or justified. There were a lot of critical reactions to Mr. Sarrazin’s statements and many people living in Germany stated in public that they did not share his point of view. In August 2010, Mr. Sarrazin published his book “Germany is self-destructing”, which included similar statements. Many important personalities took public positions against the views put forward in the book. Chancellor Angela Merkel called Mr. Sarrazin’s statements “stupid” and the Social Democratic Party, to which Mr. Sarrazin belongs, initiated a procedure for exclusion from the Party. This discussion showed that a majority of the German population did not share the opinion of Mr. Sarrazin and it is not true that a main part of the society was encouraged and confirmed in their latent racism because of the interview and the decisions to terminate the criminal investigations. The State party submits that there was no increased risk for the petitioner or its members of becoming victims of future criminal acts. Rather, as a consequence of the interview, the discussion on how to improve the situation of immigrants and how to promote their integration has gained welcome prominence. 4.6With regard to the alleged violation of article 6 of the Convention, the State party notes that effective criminal prosecution of racist acts is generally ensured by the principle of mandatory prosecution. Although the petitioner was not allowed to lodge a complaint and was not entitled to appeal because it was not a directly aggrieved party, the Prosecutor General in his supervisory role scrutinized the decision of the Office of Public Prosecution. 4.7With regard to the alleged violation of article 2(1(d) of the Convention, the State party notes that any dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, incitement to racial discrimination as well as all acts of violence or incitement to such acts against any race or group of persons of another ethnic origin constitute an offence punishable by law. In the instant case, the prosecution could not establish that Mr. Sarrazin intended to cause any disadvantages for the segments of the population mentioned in the interview. This being so, the importance of freedom of speech precluded the authorities from bringing criminal charges against him. Petitioner’s comments on the State party’s observations on admissibility and merits 5.1On 7 March 2011, the petitioner submitted its comments on the State party’s observations and notes that in German, the terms such as “supply a bride” or “produce headscarf girls” have deeply degrading and contemptuous connotations. The petitioner notes, as the State party demonstrated, that the statements were subsequently repeated in Mr. Sarrazin’s book published in August 2010, and are an expansion of the statements found in the present complaint. In the debates following the book’s publication, contrary to the State party’s observation, it emerged that a majority of the German population agreed with Mr. Sarrazin’s racist statements, and as a consequence verbal and physical attacks against immigrants increased. According to studies, Islamophobic attitudes during the