New Delhi:

In the summertime of 2020, when the world got here to a standstill due to the coronavirus pandemic, Indian-origin physician Kulvinder Kaur Gill spoke out in opposition to government-imposed lockdowns and vaccination mandates. However her stance was met with lawsuits by medical our bodies and censorship by X/Twitter’s earlier administration. 

Dr Gill, a doctor in Canada specialising in immunology and paediatrics, is now embroiled in a authorized battle stemming from her Covid-related tweets. Going through a frightening CAD 300,000 (Rs 1,83,75,078) in authorized charges, she obtained help from X, which has pledged to cowl her bills.

“As a result of she spoke out publicly on Twitter (now X) in opposition to the Canadian and Ontario governments’ COVID lockdown efforts and vaccination mandates, she was harassed by the legacy media, censored by prior Twitter administration, and subjected to investigations and disciplinary proceedings by the School of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario that resulted in “cautions” being positioned on her everlasting public file,” X mentioned in an announcement.

In help of your proper to talk https://t.co/qWCOYYALPf

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 24, 2024

“When Elon Musk discovered earlier this week about her crowdfunding marketing campaign to pay the judgment ( he pledged to assist. X will now fund the remainder of Dr. Gill’s marketing campaign in order that she will be able to pay her $300,000 judgment and her authorized payments,” it added.

The following authorized proceedings drained Dr Gill’s life financial savings, leaving her with a considerable debt. 

The Indian-origin physician is a vocal critic in opposition to vaccination. “If in case you have not but discovered that we do not want a vaccine, you aren’t paying consideration. #FactsNotFear,” she posted on X in August, 2020. 

Her posts have been closely criticised by the medical group and likewise by many within the mainstream media. Dr Gill sued 23 medical doctors, journalists, and information shops, claiming that they have been a part of a defamation marketing campaign in opposition to her. 

The lawsuit was thrown out by a decide citing anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit In opposition to Public Participation) regulation, stating that Dr Gill’s intention was to stifle her critics’ speech on a public platform. Dr Gill was instructed to cowl the defendants’ authorized bills.