PRESS RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Presentation of Evidence Ends in Federal Data Scientist's Disciplinary Hearing:
Can a Public Servant's Duty of Loyalty Be More Important Than Public Health and Safety?

OTTAWA, October 29, 2026 — The presentation of evidence in a public hearing before the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations and Employment Board (FPSLREB) ended on October 23, 2026. The case concerns a senior federal data scientist who was disciplined after publicly raising concerns about the Canadian government's COVID-19 vaccination policies and the official data used to support them.

Dr. Dmitry Gorodnichy, a senior data scientist at the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), is challenging a five-day suspension imposed in October 2022 after he spoke first at work and then publicly about COVID-19 vaccine safety, effectiveness, and government data.

The hearing took place in February and October 2026. Both sides must now submit their final arguments in writing before the Board makes its decision.

How It All Started: A Choice Between Taking the Second Shot and Losing His Job

Dr. Dmitry Gorodnichy was not initially opposed to COVID-19 vaccination. He received his first vaccine dose early in the vaccination campaign.

However, after observing what he believed could be vaccine side effects among family members and colleagues, and being unable to report them, he became concerned about the risks of taking another dose. He also began questioning the need for these vaccines and the transparency of information about their side effects and effectiveness.

Following his beliefs in Dharma—the righteous way of living—and Karma—the consequences of our actions, he applied for a religious exemption. Based on the evidence available to him at the time, he was convinced that taking the second shot could harm both his physical and spiritual well-being.

When he was informed in January 2022 that his request had been denied, he faced a difficult choice: take the second vaccine dose against his concerns and beliefs, or lose his job and income for an unknown period of time. He was the main source of income for his family with four children.

As a senior data scientist trained in evaluating the performance of commercial systems using data—which had been his main responsibility at CBSA since joining the agency in 2007—he decided to examine the official government data himself before making that decision.

With support from the data science community, which he led at the time, he developed interactive tools to examine vaccine-related data published by the government. These included Statistics Canada data on deaths by age and cause, and Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) data on COVID-19 deaths by vaccination status and age.

His analysis raised many serious questions about the risks of vaccination and the evidence supporting its effectiveness. He concluded that he could not, in good conscience and in keeping with his religious beliefs, take the second dose.

He also observed firsthand, and had his concerns confirmed by colleagues from Canadian universities, the use of obfuscating “cumulative” reporting techniques in official data on COVID-19 cases and deaths by vaccination status. He argued that these techniques hid concerning trends of ever-increasing COVID-19 death rates among vaccinated people. His concerns about the reporting methods were later supported by the government's response to an Order Paper Question (OPQ). The relevant documents were entered into the official hearing record as exhibits.

Unable to find a public link to the online vaccine side-effect reporting form, he worked with colleagues at Health Canada to build a portal and training materials to help other colleagues report suspected vaccine side effects. At the time, he did not know that Health Canada had removed the link immediately before COVID-19 vaccination began. He discovered this later by examining the history of Health Canada's website and the government's response to an Order Paper Question (OPQ). Documents showing these changes were entered into the official hearing record as exhibits.

He also raised concerns about an increase in deaths among young Canadians starting with the introduction of vaccination mandates, as early as the winter of 2022. These concerns were documented in the Employer's investigation report prepared in 2022. Official data published several months later, in September 2022, by Statistics Canada showed the same concerning increase in deaths among young Canadians. The relevant government data and documents were also entered into the official hearing record as exhibits.

What began as an attempt to report suspected vaccine side effects experienced by a family member, and a search for evidence to make an informed personal decision about his own health, soon became a much larger concern about the COVID-19 information the Government of Canada was—and was not—providing to Canadians.

He began raising his questions with CBSA management and seeking opportunities to discuss the data with colleagues and other scientists.

After being placed on leave without pay (LWOP), he continued developing applications to help Canadians examine official government COVID-19 data directly from the source. He also invited other data scientists, including scientists from the United States and the United Kingdom, to his weekly seminars and shared his observations publicly.

He continued this work until he was reinstated in June 2022, following the suspension of the federal vaccination mandates.

While he was on leave without pay, his employer accused him of violating his duty of loyalty to the government. In October 2022, after his return to work, CBSA imposed a five-day disciplinary suspension.

A Case About the Duty of Loyalty and the Right to Raise Public-Health Concerns

The main question is whether a public servant's duty of loyalty to the government can justify punishment when that employee publicly raises concerns about government policies that they believe may put people's health and safety at risk.

In Fraser v. Public Service Staff Relations Board (1985), the Supreme Court of Canada recognized that public servants may speak out against government policies in certain situations, including when the government is acting illegally or when its policies put people's lives, health, or safety at risk.

These principles, also examined in Haydon, are important to this case.

“As a data scientist, I believe that when official data show serious problems, our responsibility is to investigate them and raise concerns—not to remain silent because the findings may be inconvenient,” said Gorodnichy.

Evidence Presented During the Hearing

During the hearing, Gorodnichy presented documents concerning:

• His attempts to raise concerns about COVID-19 vaccines with CBSA management before speaking publicly.

• His analysis of official Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) data and concerns about how vaccine effectiveness was presented to Canadians.

• Changes to Health Canada's website that affected how people could find information about reporting suspected vaccine side effects.

• Official Statistics Canada data showing changes in death rates during the vaccination period, particularly among younger Canadians, and his concerns about a possible connection.

• His communications with government officials and scientists, including the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner (PSIC), the Office of the Auditor General (OAG), and Canada's Chief Science Advisor, about the problems he had identified.

The evidence included official government documents, internal emails, scientific analyses, and government answers to questions from Members of Parliament.

Gorodnichy maintains that he spoke out because he was concerned about public health and the proper use of scientific evidence, not because he wanted to undermine his employer.

“My case raises a question that affects every Canadian: What happens when a government scientist identifies a potential danger to public health, raises concerns internally, and believes those concerns are not being properly addressed? Should that scientist remain silent, or should protecting the public come first?”

What Happens Next?

The Board ended the presentation of evidence on October 23, 2026, and set the following deadlines:

• November 27, 2026: CBSA must submit its final written arguments.

• December 11, 2026: Gorodnichy must submit his response.

• December 22, 2026: CBSA may submit a final reply.

The Board has not yet made a decision.

The case number is FPSLREB 566-02-48305 — Dmitry Gorodnichy v. Canada Border Services Agency.

Why This Case Matters to All Canadians

This case is about more than one employee's suspension. It raises an important question: Should government employees be punished for speaking publicly when they believe government policies may put people's health and safety at risk?

It also raises questions about whether government scientists can openly discuss problems they find in official data without fear of punishment.

“This is not simply about my five-day suspension. It is about whether public servants can do what they believe is right when they see government decisions that may put Canadians at risk.”

Further Information

Case information, supporting documents, and hearing updates:

IVIM.ca/hearing 

Media contact:

Dr. Dmitry Gorodnichy
Senior Data Scientist, Canada Border Services Agency - Chief Data Office (at the time of the hearing)

The case is still before the Board. The documents accepted as exhibits are now part of the official hearing record. Their acceptance does not mean that the Board has agreed with every conclusion drawn from them.

The Grievor acknowledges the assistance of many of his public servant colleagues, including those who agreed to testify but were not called, and those who could not testify because of fear of reprisals. He asks everyone following the hearing to remain courteous in their comments on social networks so that the legal process can proceed without disruption and the matter can be heard fully and fairly.

— END —

Disclaimer: The views and statements in this press release are my own. I am speaking in my personal capacity and do not represent CBSA, the Government of Canada, or any other organization.