Turpin and Siddiqui challenged the constitutionality of the provisions on two grounds. First, they claimed that section 11(f) of the Charter granted them a right to choose between judge alone or judge and jury, which was violated by the Code provisions.
Turpin and Siddiqui argued that the Charter's section 11(f) granted them the right to decide whether they wanted a judge alone or a judge and jury in their trials, but the Code provisions contradicted this right.