COVID ‘Censorship’ Key Issue in Tribunal Hearings Against Ontario Doctor: Lawyer

A person draws out Moderna vaccine during a drive through COVID-19 vaccine clinic at St. Lawrence College in Kingston, Ontario, on Jan. 2, 2022. The Canadian Press/Lars Hagberg

Dr. Mark Trozzi made public comments against COVID-19 public health measures, and his professional regulator may revoke his medical license for what it says is “professional misconduct.”

“Ultimately, Dr. Trozzi’s case is about whether we will have state censorship in this country,” his lawyer, Michael Alexander, said on June 13 as a series of tribunal hearings on Trozzi’s case began.

The regulator, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO), is closely linked with the government, it is “an extension of the government,” Alexander said. And thus it’s not just about a regulator censoring its licensees, Alexander said, but about the free speech of Canadians in general.

The CPSO will argue as the hearings progress that “Dr. Trozzi went far beyond any reasonable debate,” said the regulator’s counsel, Elisabeth Widner.

She said she will show throughout the hearings that the CPSO has the legal right to limit speech in this case because it must do so to carry out its statutory objective to regulate the profession and prevent harm to patients.

Widner criticized Trozzi for making public statements, including on Twitter, that deaths allegedly resulting from the vaccine are “mass murder.” She also criticized him for saying “COVID crimes against humanity” are a violation of the Nuremberg Code—a set of ethical principles against human experimentation formed in reaction to the misdeeds of Nazi scientists.

“No doubt you will find postings, articles, and videos from Dr. Trozzi that you will find offensive, angering, discomfiting, and inflammatory,“ Alexander said. ”However, that is not a reason to censor Dr. Trozzi.”

Alexander said all opinions—including “offensive” opinions or minority ones—are protected by the Charter.

“The Charter does not prohibit offensive expression for one fundamental reason: It isn’t possible to separate speech that is intended only to offend from speech that offends because it strikes at the truth,” Alexander said.

Also to be examined in the hearings are vaccine exemptions Trozzi issued.

Vaccine Exemptions

The CPSO issued three guidelines to doctors amid the pandemic: to not speak publicly against public health orders, to not issue vaccine exemptions except under rare circumstances, and to not prescribe alternative treatments for COVID-19.

Alexander argues that these guidelines do not carry the weight of law nor does violating them constitute professional misconduct.

The tribunal also agreed that they are guidelines rather than regulations in an preliminary hearing on Jan. 19 that combined Trozzi’s case with two other Ontario doctors represented by Alexander, Dr. Crystal Luchkiw and Dr. Patrick Phillips.

Widner said one of her expert witnesses, Dr. Aaron Orkin, has reviewed 27 vaccine exemptions issued by Trozzi.

“[Orkin] came to the opinion that Dr. Trozzi failed to maintain the standard of practice of the profession and displayed a lack of knowledge and judgment,” Widner said.

Alexander took issue not only with the CPSO examining the exemptions, which he argues do not relate to professional misconduct as they only represent a breach of “mere guidelines.” He also took issue with the CPSO calling expert witnesses to try to refute Trozzi’s medical opinion, which Alexander argues is his Charter right to express no matter how many other doctors have different opinions.

‘Misinformation’ on Trial

Widner will call two other witnesses “to provide evidence that Dr. Trozzi displays deficits in knowledge and judgment,” she said, and that his “communications contain inaccurate, misleading, and inflammatory statements.”

One of her witnesses will also present a study showing “the very real harms caused to the public by science and health misinformation,” Widner said.

Alexander said he will call his own expert witnesses on these matters, not because he thinks such testimony is relevant, but because the CPSO has made this move and Trozzi “has been forced to respond.”

“The expert evidence in this case is completely irrelevant to the determination of the main legal issue,” Alexander said, which is Trozzi’s right to express his opinion.

Alexander said he will also challenge the validity of the witnesses, arguing they are not objective and impartial. He said he expects the CPSO to similarly challenge his witnesses, since they have appeared at some of the same conferences as Trozzi. He will argue, however, that his witnesses are more impartial than the CPSO’s.

‘It’s a Free Country’

Alexander concluded his opening remarks by citing the late Romanian-Canadian journalist George Jonas who spoke of how one used to often hear the phrase, “You’re entitled to your opinion; it’s a free country.” Jonas told McLean’s magazine in 2005 that one doesn’t hear that so often any more.

“The real question for us in this hearing is not whether Dr. Trozzi is fit to practice medicine,” Alexander said. “The real question is whether we will once again have a country based on tolerance, a country that does not accept state censorship, a country where we can accept our differences and say ‘You’re entitled to your opinion. After all, it’s a free country.’”

Widner concluded her opening remarks saying, “The college’s position is that the evidence as a whole will demonstrate that Dr. Trozzi is ungovernable and has complete disregard for the regulatory system of which he is still a member.”