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

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’re going to have state censorship in this country,” his attorney, Michael Alexander, said on June 13 as a series of hearings on Trozzi’s case began.

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

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

She said she will demonstrate at the hearings that the CPSO has a legal right to restrict speech in this case because it must do so to fulfill its statutory goal of regulating the profession and preventing harm to patients.

Widner criticized Trozzi for making public statements, including on Twitter, that there would be deaths from the vaccine “Mass murder.” She also criticized him for it proverb “COVID crimes against humanity” are a violation of the Nuremberg Code — a set of ethical principles against human experimentation created in response to the misdeeds of Nazi scientists.

“You’re bound to find messages, articles and videos from Dr. Trozzi that you’ll find offensive, angry, uncomfortable and inflammatory,” Alexander said. “However, that is no reason to censor Dr. Trozzi.”

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

“The Charter does not prohibit events of offensive speech for one fundamental reason: it is not possible to separate speech that is intended only to offend from speech that is offensive because it touches the truth,” Alexander said.

Vaccine waivers issued by Trozzi should also be examined during the hearings.

Vaccine exemptions

The CPSO has issued three guidelines to doctors during the pandemic: not to speak out publicly against public health orders, not to give vaccine waivers except in rare circumstances, and not to prescribe alternative treatments for COVID-19.

Alexander argues that these guidelines do not carry the weight of the law and that violating them does not constitute professional misconduct.

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

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

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

Not only did Alexander disagree with the CPSO’s examination of the waivers, which he says are not related to professional misconduct as they amount to a violation of “guidelines only”. He also disagreed with the fact that the CPSO had called expert witnesses to try to refute Trozzi’s medical opinion, which Alexander says is his right to express the Charter, no matter how many other doctors have differing opinions.

‘Incorrect information’ about Trial

Widner will call two other witnesses “to prove that Dr. Trozzi is deficient 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 that shows “the very real harm done to the public by misinformation about science and health,” Widner said.

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

“The expert evidence in this case is completely irrelevant to determining 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 that they are not objective and impartial. He said he expects the CPSO to similarly challenge his witnesses, as they have appeared at some of the same conferences as Trozzi. However, he will claim that his witnesses are more impartial than those of the CPSO.

‘It’s a free country’

Alexander concluded his opening remarks by quoting the late Romanian-Canadian journalist George Jonas, who spoke of how one often heard the phrase, “You are entitled to your opinion; it is a free country.” Jonas told McLean’s magazine in 2005 that you don’t hear that very often anymore.

“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 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 are entitled to your opinion. It is, after all, a free country.’”

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