Disciplinary proceedings against outspoken doctor Kulvinder Kaur Gill have been withdrawn by her regulator, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (CPSO). .Gill, a Greater Toronto Area physician, has significant post-graduate training in pediatrics, and allergy and clinical immunology, including scientific research in microbiology, virology and vaccinology..She shared scientific studies and opinions about government COVID-19 policies on Twitter ("X") since the start of the pandemic, including her concerns about the harms caused by lockdowns and mandates, particularly to the most marginalized members of society. .As a result of her online advocacy, Gill has faced constant investigations and disciplinary actions by the CPSO since August 2020, when she was the target of an online campaign by other doctors, media and members of the public to generate complaints against her..Seven public (non-patient) complaints were made to the CPSO about Gaul’s tweets, and a separate registrar’s investigation was also initiated. All eight matters were considered by a committee of the CPSO, called the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee (ICRC), on February 3, 2021..Details of those proceedings, and the tweets which resulted in “cautions” ordered against Dr. Gill, can be found in the TDF’s earlier news release. .Immediately following these ICRC decisions, which were upheld by the Health Professions Appeal and Review Board (HPARB) and are now the subject of a pending judicial review to be heard in Divisional Court in early 2024, the CPSO initiated a second, high-level registrar’s investigation into Gill’s social media commentary. This culminated in a further report to the ICRC in the summer of 2022. .Although Gill provided extensive legal submissions and medical and scientific literature supporting all of her public commentary, as well as an expert report by the former Chief Medical Officer for Ontario, Dr. Richard Schabas, the matter was sent by the ICRC to the disciplinary tribunal in Oct. 2022..In a summary of the Notice of Hearing published to Gill’s public register, the CPSO charged that, “between approximately February 2021 and 2022, Gill engaged in disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional conduct and/or failed to maintain the standard of practice of the profession and/or is incompetent in relation to her communications, including but not limited to communications on social media/online/digital platforms regarding the COVID-19 pandemic and related issues..This includes but is not limited to making misleading, false or inflammatory statements about vaccinations, treatments and public health measures for COVID-19.”.Since a massive trove of thousands of tweets and retweets was produced by the CPSO to support the charge, Gill requested particulars so she could understand the case she was required to meet..Although the investigation report against Gill and her lengthy submissions in response to it cannot be publicly disclosed, due to being part of the College’s disclosure, the CPSO’s statement of particulars and Gill’s letter in response to it are public documents under the Tribunal Rules of Procedure..The CPSO took the stated position that the “totality” of Gill’s Twitter commentary “would have had the effect of undermining public confidence in measures taken to combat the COVID-19 pandemic and would have had the effect of deterring the public from complying with public health measures. The communications are unprofessional, unbalanced and uniformly opposed to public health measures.”.Gill and her lawyer, Lisa Bildy, supported by The Democracy Fund (TDF), vigorously opposed this characterization of Gill’s commentary and had been preparing for the upcoming hearing, including lining up both Ontario-based and world-renowned experts..However, the CPSO suddenly withdrew its Notice of Hearing on September 12, meaning it has dropped its case against Dr. Gill..“While we are pleased that some of the burden has now been lifted from Gill’s shoulders and she has been vindicated, it is concerning that it went this far,” said Bildy. .“The top-down imposition of a singular unquestionable narrative, on pain of disciplinary proceedings, has been damaging not only to the doctors who advocated for evidence-based medicine and robust scientific debate about novel public health measures and their consequences, but it has also been damaging to the credibility of the institutions which imposed them.”.In the meantime, her judicial review of the cautions, relating to tweets in 2020 opposing harmful lockdowns, will continue.
