CERD/C/71/D/36/2006 Page 12 instrument, and decided in the ICERD to focus exclusively on racial discrimination.10 It is unquestionable therefore that discrimination based exclusively on religious grounds was not intended to fall within the purview of the Convention. 6.4 The Committee recalls its prior jurisprudence in Quereshi v. Denmark that, “a general reference to foreigners does not at present single out a group of persons, contrary to article 1 of the Convention, on the basis of a specific race, ethnicity, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin” 11. Similarly, in this particular case, it considers that the general references to Muslims, do not single out a particular group of persons, contrary to article 1 of the Convention. It, therefore, concludes that the petition falls outside the scope of the Convention and declares it inadmissible ratione materiae under article 14, paragraph 1, of the Convention. 6.5 Although the Committee considers that it is not within its competence to examine the present petition, it takes note of the offensive nature of the statements complained of and recalls that freedom of speech carries with it both duties and responsibilities. It takes the opportunity to remind the State party of its Concluding Observations, following consideration of the State party’s reports in 2002 and 2006, in which it had commented and made recommendations upon: (a) the considerable increase in reported cases of widespread harassment of people of Arab and Muslim backgrounds since 11 September 2001; (b) the increase in the number of racially motivated offences; and (c) the increase in the number of complaints of hate speech, including by politicians within the State party.12 It also encourages the State party to follow-up on its recommendations and to provide pertinent information on the above concerns in the context of the Committee’s procedure for follow-up to its concluding observations. 7. The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination therefore decides: (a) That the communication is inadmissible ratione materiae under article 14, paragraph 1, of the Convention. (b) That this decision shall be communicated to the State party and to the petitioner. [Adopted in English, French, Spanish and Russian, the English text being the original version. Subsequently to be issued also in Arabic and Chinese as part of the Committee’s annual report to the General Assembly.] ----10 General Assembly resolution 1779 (XVII), General Assembly resolution 1780 (XVII), and General Assembly resolution 1781 (XVII). 11 12 See Petition No. 33/2003, Opinion adopted on 9 March 2005, para. 7.3 CERD/C/60/CO/5, 21 May 2002, and CERD/C/DEN/CO/17, 19 October 2006.