The Divisional Court has issued a ruling in the case of Dr. Kulvinder Kaur Gill, deciding to fully support the actions of the College of Physicians and Surgeons (CPSO). Dr. Gill will be seeking a leave to appeal over this decision.

Dr Gill had shared opinions on social media that countered the position of public health officials.  The CPSO labelled her posts as misinformation and levied professional cautions against her.

While the Court agreed that the information she shared in her posts was not necessarily incorrect, it was inconsistent with the official position of her governing body, the CPSO, and of the public health orders in effect.

Dr. Gill further believes that the actions of the CPSO constituted a breach of her right to freedom of speech, while the Court determined that the CPSO actions against her were proportionate, balancing her right to freedom of speech with her professional responsibilities.

Dr. Gill provided an abundance of evidence to support the opinions in question; evidence the Court refused to re-evaluate. Instead, they deferred to the CPSO’s own evaluation, stating that their panel consisted of “physicians with highly relevant expertise…that this court does not have” when in reality the CPSO panel had actually deferred to the “expertise” of government’s public health arm.

The Divisional Court also dismissed arguments that the CPSO’s publishing of the cautions on Dr. Gill’s public register, and the distribution of these cautions to hospitals and regulators across the continent were punitive, instead referring to these actions as merely a “remedial measure.”

Essentially, no one in this case has evaluated the accuracy of the evidence used by the government to establish their health policies nor have they reviewed Dr. Gill’s evidence contradicting the government’s position.

In addition, both the CPSO and the Court have taken the position that doctors should not express opinions contradicting government or its public health edicts, regardless of the accuracy of the contradictory opinions.

How did Canada, the strong and free, become a country where the government is assumed to be right, regardless of evidence, and where speaking truth is a punishable offence?

To read the True North article written by Clayton DeMaine, click here 

To read the Superior Court of Justice Divisional Court decision, click here