Translation of the Meaning of the Quran - PS $13.95
	Adam's World: One Big Family (DVD) $19.95 $14.95
	**Write & Erase Using Damp-Erase Markers! Activity Placemat of Arabic Numbers $5.50 $4.40

McDonald's: The Latest On The Case

Chicago Cook County Circuit Court Judge Richard Siebel set February 25 as the date when all outstanding issues pertaining to the McDonald's Corporation's $10 million settlement with Hindu, vegetarian, Kosher and other groups will be decided on during a January 27 hearing.

The settlement aims to compensate for the fast food giant's false claim since the early 1990s that its french fries and hash browns were fit for vegetarian consumption. In fact, McDonald's has admitted that it uses beef extract in these products, thus provoking the ire of vegetarians, Hindus, Kosher groups, Muslims, and others who ate these items thinking they were suitable for their consumption.

Judge Siebel also tried to verify the tax exempt status of the groups scheduled to receive compensation. The Attorney General is to submit a report to Siebel by February 17 about this.

Since the case against McDonald's was brought to court by Seattle, Washington based lawyer Harish Bharti on behalf of eight vegetarians in 2001, it has been fraught with problems. In terms of the settlement that McDonald's has agreed to, Bharti, as well as some of the original plaintiffs in the case, have accused McDonald's and the original lawyers in the class action lawsuit of collusion on the issue of which groups will receive financial compensation from the settlement.

Also, a number of vegetarians are objecting to the vegetarian groups that have been selected to receive compensation in the settlement. They argue that that ones chosen are fringe, not core vegetarian groups that should really receive the money. In addition, a number of the groups chosen also do not promote vegetarianism.

The Muslim community was originally not recognized as a plaintiff in the case. However, last summer, after hundreds of Muslims from across America filed opt outs and objections to the case, Judge Siebel decided to include the community as part of the vegetarian class, making it eligible for compensation. Siebel had originally argued that since no Muslim individual or group had been a part of the original case like the Hindu and Kosher communities, for example, the Muslims could not claim compensation.

The Muslim community is now scheduled to receive $550,000 in compensation.

However, this too, has raised objections. Greg Kazarian is one of the lawyers in the case representing the Muslim community, among other plaintiffs. He argues that the Muslim community is being shortchanged by the settlement because it is set to receive only a little more than half of what the other plaintiffs will. The other groups are expected to receive $1 million.

"When you defined class to include all communities, you imposed on yourself the obligation to treat equally all faith groups," he says in an interview with Sound Vision from his office in downtown Chicago.

But beyond the issue of financial compensation, Kazarian explains that the Muslim community's objection is to the selection of the groups who are eligible to receive compensation, which do not further the cause of disclosure of information about McDonald's products to consumers.

"The projects being proposed don't use the money to make progress on the issue of disclosure and development of alternatives to make a broad range of foods available to people whose faith imposes dietary restrictions," he explains in an interview with Sound Vision from his office in downtown Chicago.

For instance, one project which is slated to receive funding is giving scholarships to people to study vegetarianism. Kazarian says the list of groups given to the court for the settlement do not satisfy its conditions.

Post your comment