Tarek Farag v. Ali Waqas

Plaintiff Tarek Farag (hereinafter Farag), sued Defendant Ali Waqas (hereinafter Waqas), in Dupage Court, IL alleging that Waqas was motivated by the hateful teachings of Islamic Sharia and committed hateful: harassment, criminal damage to property, criminal trespassing, and invading Farag’s privacy and spying on him. Farag supported his allegations with some hateful Sharia’s teachings. On the first hearing, Judge Rohm declared that Sharia is untouchable, and that no one can issue any order against it. Farag filed motions for Injunctive Relief and to Declare Islamic Sharia Contrary to our Constitution and laws, supported by many additional Sharia’s teachings, which Judge Rohm denied. Farag appealed the denial and the Appellate Court affirmed it, and Illinois Supreme Court denied his petition for leave to appeal on 10/7/2020. Later, Judge Rohm sanctioned Farag for stating Sharia’s facts, struck them all, banned Farag from bringing any, and threatened Farag with sanctions and jail time if he tries to bring them. The Questions Pr esented are: < Whether Sharia is contrary to Our Constitution and laws? Whether Sharia is untouchable? Whether the Court erred in not granting the injunction and not Declaring Sharia Unconstitutional? Should Judges rule on ly on the record, not the public information, nor their personal opinion? Should Judges fear the objections or violence of others that are against the fair application of the law? The Supreme Court should fix our broken legal system. The Supreme Court should give more attention to the cases involving large political impact. The Courts, at all levels, should allow the parties to record the proceedings and allow the public easy access to all public Court records.