No legal basis to investigate COVID dissident doctors, lawyer states

A motion presented by lawyer Michael Alexander on November 23 sought to invalidate further hearings scheduled for three doctors who are facing disciplinary action by their regulatory body, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO).

One thing that they all have in common was a general skepticism of the evidence supporting COVID-19 related restrictions – from harmful lockdowns, treatment options, and mandates.

Dr. Mark Trozzi, Dr. Patrick Phillips and Dr. Crystal Luchkiw have all been restricted in their practicing duties, some suspended completely, and face further disciplinary actions by the College.

The restrictions placed on them (and all physicians) essentially gag ordered them from saying anything contrary to public health orders or COVID-19 recommendations. They are further obstructed from writing medical exemptions from the novel injections and/or indiscriminate masking except in extreme circumstances, and are banned from prescribing alternative/early treatments.

The merit of the motion was that the restrictions placed on the physicians violated their fundamental charter rights to freedom of expression, life, liberty and security of the person.

Their crime? They are suspected to have prescribed early, alternative COVID-19 treatments to their patients, written mask and vaccine exemptions, and provided their patients with legally-required informed consent before indiscriminately injecting them with a COVID-19 shot.

Dr. Phillips is also being prosecuted for the crime of filing COVID-19 adverse events reports with his local medical officer of health. Shortly after the novel injection was rolled out on mass, he began noticing reactions in his emergency department. None of his reports were filed with the Canadian Adverse Events Following Immunization Surveillance System (CAEFISS).

Dr Phillips has been repeatedly slandered, smeared & censored

Shortly after the injection roll out, he detailed how his vaccine AE reports were being filibustered by local MOH, thus never making it into CAEFISS https://t.co/Qtmz15sfcG

— Tamara Ugolini 🇨🇦 (@TamaraUgo) November 23, 2022

Dr. Trozzi was an early whistleblower denouncing the narrative that hospitals were overrun as evidenced by what he saw with his own eyes at the emergency department where he used to work. He continued to be a dissent doctor, highlighting that the justification for further public health measures were not justified and made little medical sense.

Dr Trozzi was 1 of the 1st COVID whistleblowers

In May 2020, he bravely shared w my colleague @TheMenzoid that his ER was empty, contradicting the entire "overwhelmed hospital" narrative used to justify PH response like mandates & lockdownshttps://t.co/uYXCsde15e

— Tamara Ugolini 🇨🇦 (@TamaraUgo) November 23, 2022

Dr. Luchkiw is further being persecuted for a refusal to disclose and submit her patients’ private and confidential medical records. This reinforced the hunch-based accusations against her, says counsel Michael Alexander.

Dr Luchkiw is being persecuted for writing exemption notes but also for upholding patient confidentiality -- a key pillar of medical ethics -- and not submitting private medical records to the CPSOhttps://t.co/OhnAZKEPwJ

— Tamara Ugolini 🇨🇦 (@TamaraUgo) November 23, 2022

In addition to the charter arguments made by Michael Alexander, he repeatedly condemns CPSO’s investigation as having no merit. Since COVID restrictions are guidelines and/or recommendations, they cannot be used as a basis for changes or investigations because they are not laws or regulations.

Michael Alexander makes opening remarks --

He says that the CPSO cannot proceed because the COVID restrictions are guidelines or recommendations, not laws or regulations, and thus cannot be used as a basis for charges or investigations

— Tamara Ugolini 🇨🇦 (@TamaraUgo) November 23, 2022

Alexander refers to the action taken by the CPSO as an overreaching fishing expedition that has not been ordered on reasonable and probable grounds (RPG).

Many of the allegations against the physicians are based on hunches and speculation, not empirical facts as required to establish RPG, he says.

He questions judicial facts being clung to by the CPSO such as the idea that vaccination helps to protect the community. This is directly counteracted by CDC guidelines stating vaccinated and unvaccinated carry similar viral loads, and real world data from the Ontario Ministry of Health. This shows that the more vaccines one receives, the more likely they are to be infected. Pfizer directors themselves have stated that they could have never tested for transmission.

MA reiterates that the injected are more likely to end up in hospital as evidenced by the "Ontario government stopping publication of hospital data approximately 5 months ago – when will the College get up to speed on judicial facts!?"

— Tamara Ugolini 🇨🇦 (@TamaraUgo) November 23, 2022

The CPSO were inundated with requests for links that they moved this particular hearing from a private YouTube channel to an unlimited public one, says Michael Alexander in e-mail communication. “It was the first time this ever happened to them and will be interesting to see how they respond,” he wrote.

Chair of the panel, Mr. Raj Anand, withheld decision and recessed for the day.

The previously publicly available and publicly streamed link has now been made private.

Concerns around the way the CPSO has handled the COVID response have also sparked protests at the College in recent months.

Another Ontario doctor alleges that the CPSO engages in criminal misconduct after his license to practice medicine was revoked by them, leaving his patients scrambling for continued life-saving treatment.

The general skepticism of the COVID-19 response as inflicting more harm than it prevents has now been clearly established, hinting that dissident doctors were right all along.

When will the CPSO start to follow the science? And if this case is successful, will the CPSO end their witch-hunt on critical thinking doctors?