PETITION FOR THE IMPEACHMENT OF THE BELOW-NAMED INDIVIDUALS; MEMBERS AND
CHIEF COUNSEL OF THE JUDICIAL CONDUCT BOARD OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
Pursuant to The Constitution of Pennsylvania, Article V, Section 18, and
Article VI, Sections 4, 5, and 6, Petitioner hereunder petitions the
Pennsylvania House of Representatives as follows.
To investigate the charges made and brought hereunder by the undersigned
Petitioner and Affiants against the individuals named herein for nonfeasance,
misfeasance and malfeasance of office , and to introduce a resolution on the
floor of Pennsylvania's House of Representatives for the purpose of bringing the
same individuals before the Senate of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for trial
of impeachment from office under Article VI, Section 5 of the Constitution.
The Pennsylvania Constitution was amended in 1993 to establish an independent
board within the judicial branch for the purpose of preserving public confidence
in the integrity of the judicial system, and to afford litigants a process for
redress of grievances against a court. This "independent" Judicial
Conduct Board replaced the "Judicial Inquiry and Review Board". See
Penna. Const., Art. V, Section 18(a). Members of this board are Public Officers
under Article VI, Section 6, and are therefore subject to the Articles of
Impeachment.
The parties to be investigated and impeached under House Rules are every
member of the Judicial Conduct Board who served on the Board during the period
of petitioner's complaint to the Board between March 1, 2001, and the current
date, and the Chief Counsel of the Judicial Conduct Board. To wit: John W.
Morris, Esq. (Chair); Wendell G. Freeland, Esq. (Vice Chair.) ; Michael M.
Robinson, (Sec.); Hon. James Gardner Colins District Justice Bob Yanich Matthew
J. DiDomenico, Sr. Stanley R. Gumberg Edward J. Keller Gary F. Lamont
Christopher A. Lewis, Esq. Hon. John L. Musmanno District Justice Samuel J.
Magaro Hon. Marilyn J. Horan John R. Cellucci Vincent J. Quinn, Esq. (Chief
Counsel)
All of the above-named defendants, save Vincent J. Quinn, were or are members
of the Judicial Conduct Board during the period of petitioner's Complaint.
Vincent J. Quinn serves as Chief Counsel for the Board, and has a duty to
advise the Board of its obligations under the Pennsylvania Constitution.
The Pennsylvania House of Representatives has authority and jurisdiction to
conduct a hearing for the purpose of impeachment of the above-named individuals
under The Pennsylvania Constitution of 1968, Article VI, Section 4.
GROUNDS FOR IMPEACHMENT:
Article V, Section 18(a)(7) of The Pennsylvania Constitution empowers the
Judicial Conduct Board stating: "The board shall receive and investigate
complaints regarding judicial conduct filed by individuals or by the Board;
issue subpoenas to compel testimony under oath of witnesses, including the
subject of the investigation; determine whether there is probable cause to file
formal charges against a justice, judge, or justice of the peace for conduct
prescribed by this section, and present the case in support of the charges
before the Court of Judicial Discipline."
Article V, Section 18(a)(7) creates a DUTY under the Pennsylvania's
Constitution for the Judicial Board of Conduct to "investigate complaints […]
filed by individuals […]". This DUTY is owed to the citizens of
Pennsylvania [the public] and to the General Assembly. Article V, Section 18
does not provide for the Board to dismiss a complaint without an investigation.
Conduct that evidences a total neglect of duty and an intentional disregard
of the rights of the public for which the duty arose is an offense for which
removal from office is the appropriate and only available remedy.
The Pennsylvania General Assembly amended Pennsylvania's Constitution to
provide protection for Pennsylvanians from a court where the standards of
justice as enumerated in the Code of Judicial Conduct have been disregarded. It
established a duty for the Judicial Conduct Board to investigate all Complaints
filed against judges in this Commonwealth. This Board has neglected that duty.
"The germ of destruction of our nation is in the power of the judiciary,
an irresponsible body - working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a
little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a
thief over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall render powerless the
checks of one branch over the other and will become as venal and oppressive as
the government from which we separated." - Thomas Jefferson, 1821
ISSUES: Whether the Judicial Conduct Board, by and through the individuals
named herein, failed to investigate a Complaint duly filed with the Board; a
total neglect of duty and a nonfeasance.
Whether the Judicial Conduct Board, by and through the individuals named
herein, improperly dismissed a Complaint duly filed with the Board; performing
its duty in such a manner as to infringe upon the rights and privileges of third
persons; a misfeasance.
Whether the Judicial Conduct Board, by and through the individuals named
herein, acted wrongfully so as to affect, interrupt, or interfere with
performance of official duty, or exercised wrongful conduct or unjust
performance of some act which it had no right to do; a malfeasance.
FACTS: The sole purpose of the Judicial Conduct Board is to investigate
allegations of improprieties by judicial officers so as to preserve public
confidence in the integrity of the judiciary.
A Judicial Conduct Board Complaint is designed in a questionnaire intended to
document a complaint and provide relevant information of the charges. The
information demanded is intended to establish a basis for an investigation of
those charges.
I, Farouk Z. Hamoui, filed a Complaint with the Judicial Conduct Board, which
was assigned JCB File No. 01-108.
Two affiants filed supplements to my Complaint, for which the Board assigned
JCB File Nos. 01-109 and 101-110.
My Complaint and the two supplements to this Complaint were bound and
submitted as one document. Documents submitted as attachments with my Complaint
include tangible evidence of violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct, which
are sufficient for the Judicial Conduct Board to conduct an in depth
investigation of those charges.
My Complaint filed with the Board charges the judge [and the court] with
criminal and judicial misconduct for altering court records; subornation of
perjury by an officer of the court; deprivation of the most fundamental rights
under the Constitution; conduct that deprives me of my constitutional right to a
full and fair hearing on the merits; and multiple acts that violate the Code of
Judicial Conduct.
The Board acknowledged receipt of this Complaint on March 20, 2001. To the
best of my knowledge, the Board took no additional action until it contacted me
and the two affiants by mail that we were subpoenaed to testify at an
investigatory hearing scheduled for February 20, 2002. (See Attachment B).
The February 20th hearing was postponed at the request of my attorney. On
March 4, 2002, he advised the Board by Fax and U.S. Mail that he was again fit
for travel, and requested that the postponed hearing be timely rescheduled. (See
Attachment C).
On March 14, 2002, the Board advised me and both affiants that all three
Complaint(s) were dismissed by the Board whereby it contends "The Board has
carefully reviewed the Confidential Complaint Questionnaire". (See
Attachment D).
My attorney advised The Board of its duty and obligation in a written demand
to reconsider its decision to dismiss my Complaint. (See Attachment E). To date
the Board has not responded to this petition, clearly demonstrating that it has
no intention to perform its lawful duty under the Constitution.
Pennsylvania's Constitution provides that the remedy available for
nonfeasance, misfeasance, or malfeasance of public officers is impeachment.
There is no other remedy available for redress of a grievance for a Pennsylvania
citizen, resident and taxpayer.
ARGUMENT: The Board claims to have acted after a "careful review"
of the questionnaire. A "careful review"does not constitute an
investigation of the charges, nor does it satisfy the minimum performance
standards expressed in Article V, Section 18(a)(7) of the Pennsylvania
Constitution, quoted above. The Complaint includes documents containing tangible
evidence that the judge complained of violated the Code of Judicial Conduct.
Clearly, there was no "careful review", a misrepresentation of fact by
the Board.
The Board's dismissal of JCB complaints 01-108, 01-109 and 01-110 prior to
any investigation of the charges constitutes a nonperformance of some act which
a person [the Board through each of its members] is obligated or has a
responsibility to perform under Article V, Section 18(a)(7); an omission to
perform a required duty; or, a total neglect of duty; a nonfeasance.
The Board's dismissal of JCB complaints 01-108, 01-109 and 01-110 after a
review of the complaint constitutes the improper doing of an act which a
[person] might lawfully do; or which the law authorizes or requires a public
officer to do; a misfeasance.
The Board's dismissal of JCB complaints 01-108, 01-109 and 01-110 after
issuing subpoenas for an investigatory hearing constitutes wrongful conduct
which affects, interrupts, or interferes with performance of official duty; a
malfeasance.
The members of the Judicial Conduct Board must be held accountable for the
intentional abandonment, and total neglect of their duty; for the improper
performance of their duty; and for wrongful conduct; all to the detriment of the
public to whom their obligation arises.
All members of the Judicial Conduct Board are declared to be public [civil]
officers under Pennsylvania's Constitution, Article VI, Section 1. Accordingly,
these public officers are subject to Articles of Impeachment under the
Pennsylvania Constitution, Article VI, Section 4.
In dismissing my Complaint, the Board denied to me the right to present my
case against a judge. In so doing, the Judicial Conduct Board is guilty of
nonfeasance of office, an omission to perform a duty; its only duty under law.
The Board's action to dismiss my complaint constitutes nonfeasance, misfeasance
and malfeasance of office.
Accordingly, I do hereby demand that the Pennsylvania House of
Representatives act in its capacity as the overseer of public officers under
Article VI, Section 4, of the Pennsylvania Constitution and to conduct a hearing
to ascertain whether the Judicial Conduct Board, its members named above and its
Chief Counsel, did improperly and unlawfully deny my right to a hearing under
the Pennsylvania Constitution.
SUMMARY: The Pennsylvania House of Representatives has a duty to uphold the
Constitution of the United States, including checks and balances against the
judicial branch of the government. The Judicial Conduct Board is a first line of
defense to protect the rights of individuals from a court rampant with disregard
of personal rights secured under the Constitutions of the United States and
Pennsylvania.
The members of this Board either willfully or negligently failed to perform
the only material function required under the Pennsylvania Constitution, that
is, to investigate complaints regarding judicial conduct filed by individuals
for a redress of grievances against a court; a total neglect of duty and a
nonfeasance. The Board did issue subpoenas, then the Board took the unauthorized
action to dismiss petitioner's Complaint without conducting any investigation, a
misfeasance and a malfeasance of office.
If the evidence shows that the Chief Counsel of the Judicial Conduct Board
failed to advise the members of their Constitutional duty to investigate every
complaint, then justice demands that the Chief Counsel be removed from office
along with each member of the Board named herein.
That several defendants' term of office on the Board expired during the
period of this complaint does not relieve them of responsibility to have
investigated the complaint during their term(s). These persons are as liable to
the public as are the members of the Board who filled the vacancies created by
the expiration(s) of their term(s).
WHEREFORE, Petitioner demands that this House of Representatives uphold the
Constitution of Pennsylvania, and to act under Article VI, Section 4, to conduct
an investigation into whether the Judicial Conduct Board abandoned its
Constitutional DUTY to investigate a complaint that alleges corrupt and criminal
activities perpetrated in a Pennsylvania court.
If the evidence shows that the Judicial Conduct Board breached its duty under
the Constitution, then this Board and its Chief Counsel must appear before the
Pennsylvania House of Representatives to defend its actions and to show cause
why each of its members, and its Chief Counsel, should not face a trial of
impeachment before the Senate of Pennsylvania in accordance with Article VI,
Section 5, of The Pennsylvania Constitution.
DATED this ___________________ day of June, 2002.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
PETITIONER
__________________________________________ FAROUK Z. HAMOUI 629 No. Jerome
Street Allentown, Pennsylvania 18109 (610) 820-4188
AFFIDAVIT OF PETITIONER IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR IMPEACHMENT
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF )
Affiant, Farouk Z. Hamoui, being duly sworn, upon oath, does hereby depose
and state as follows:
I am a legal resident of the City of Allentown, County of Lehigh,
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
I am the respondent (defendant) in a civil action for child support in the
Court of Common Pleas of Lehigh County; Ternigan v. Hamoui, case number
89-DR-1459, PACSES No. 907002114.
I execute and submit this affidavit in support of my Petition for the
Impeachment of the members of Pennsylvania's Judicial Conduct Board [as named in
the Petition] and its Chief Counsel, Vincent J. Quinn, Esq..
The statements made in this Affidavit are based on my personal knowledge --
as follows:
Pursuant to Pennsylvania's Constitution, Article V, Section 18, I previously
filed a formal Confidential Complaint with the Pennsylvania Judicial Conduct
Board to investigate charges of judicial improprieties, violations of the Code
of Judicial Conduct and criminal misconduct by Judge Alan M. Black of The Court
of Common Pleas of Lehigh County.
The Judicial Conduct Board assigned file number(s) to my Complaint. [JCB
01-108, 01-109, and 01-110, see Attachment B] Other than assigning file numbers,
the Board has taken no investigative action. Finally, after ten months, the
Board scheduled an investigatory hearing, which had been scheduled for February
20th, 2002. Due to a back injury, my attorney requested, and was granted, a
continuance for the February 20th hearing.
On March 4th, 2002, my attorney advised the Board that he was able to travel,
and requested that the investigatory hearing be promptly rescheduled.
On March 14t, 2002, without inquiry, or contacting myself or either of the
two Affiants who submitted supplements to my Confidential Complaint, the Board
dismissed the Complaint, failing to conduct even the most rudimentary
investigation.
In dismissing the Complaint, the Board acted contrary to its duty under
Pennsylvania's Constitution. My attorney demanded that the Board reinstate my
Complaint, serving notice of the misfeasance and malfeasance by the Board. To
date, the Complaint has not been reinstated, demonstrating that the Board has no
intention of reconsidering its unlawful action.
The action by the Judicial Conduct Board in this matter constitutes a
dereliction of a Constitutional duty; a nonfeasance, misfeasance and malfeasance
of office. Each member of the Judicial Conduct Board named herein should be
impeached by the Pennsylvania House of Representatives.
FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT.
__________________________________________ Affiant - Farouk Z. Hamoui
