The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has dismissed reports that a Canadian court has designated Nigeria’s two main political parties, the PDP and the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), as terrorist organisations.
The federal government is, however, expected to issue a formal response today, senior government officials told our correspondent yesterday, describing the matter as “an embarrassing development”, reports Daily Trust.
Speaking to our correspondent, PDP National Executive Committee (NEC) member, Timothy Osadolor, said while the Canadian court had a right to express its opinion, it did not make such claims factual.
“But there is nothing in their opinion and their right to express it that makes whatever they have said true,” Osadolor said.
He argued that instead of labelling the entire political structures in Nigeria, the Canadian court should have targeted individuals linked to terrorism, particularly within the APC.
“There are credible Nigerians in the APC, not to mention a credible platform like the PDP, which was unfairly lumped together with a party that has brought ignominy to Nigeria and Nigerians. The Canadian government overreached by joining the PDP alongside the APC as a party linked to terrorism,” he said.
Osadolor described the ruling as a vote of no confidence in the Nigerian government under President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, urging the administration to take the matter seriously.
“President Tinubu may not be linked to terrorism, but his ineptitude and inability to fight it head-on have made him a victim of terror networks currently ravaging Nigerian states. Instead of focusing on state security for all Nigerians, over 90 per cent of his efforts have gone into regime security,” he said.
He added that the court’s ruling should serve as “a wake-up call” for the president.
Efforts to get the APC’s reaction and that of the federal government were unsuccessful as of press time. APC spokespersons, Felix Morka and Bala Ibrahim, did not respond to calls and messages, while the Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman, Kimiebi Imomotimi Ebienfa, has not replied to the message sent to him.
However, a senior government official said the ministry would issue a formal response once the ruling’s authenticity is confirmed.
“Immediately we authenticate it, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs will issue the government’s formal reaction, and we expect the parties to defend themselves,” the official, who asked not to be named, said.
What the Canadian court decided
The Canadian Federal Court upheld a landmark immigration tribunal ruling that declared the APC and PDP terrorist organisations while refusing asylum to former party member, Douglas Egharevba over his decade-long affiliation with both parties.
According to the Peoples Gazette, Justice Phuong Ngo, in a judgement delivered on June 17, 2025, dismissed Egharevba’s application for judicial review after Canada’s Immigration Appeal Division (IAD) found him inadmissible under the security provisions of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA).
Justice Ngo ruled that “the conduct of individuals who are members of the PDP, including high-ranking officials, and those who committed political violence and intimidation on their behalf, is too widespread and persistent over too great a period of time to dissociate the leadership of the party from their actions.”
Canada’s Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness argued that both the PDP and APC were deeply implicated in political violence, subversion of democracy, and electoral bloodshed.
The Federal Court in Canada hears cases assigned under federal law and operates nationwide. Its jurisdiction is conferred by the Federal Courts Act and other statutes.
Justice Phuong T.V. Ngo, who delivered the ruling, immigrated to Canada from Vietnam as a child. She earned degrees from Carleton University and the University of Ottawa before being called to the Ontario Bar in 2000.
The Egharevba case
Egharevba joined the PDP at its founding in 1999 before defecting to the APC in 2007, remaining there until 2017. He claimed his record was untainted by the violence associated with Nigerian politics and denied any involvement in terrorism or subversion.
After arriving in Canada in September 2017, he disclosed his political affiliations in immigration documents.
Questioned by the Canada Border Services Agency in 2018, he confirmed his memberships.
However, authorities flagged his affiliations, citing intelligence and international reports linking both parties to electoral misconduct and politically motivated killings.
The IAD focused on the PDP’s record during the 2003 and 2004 polls as “sufficient and determinative” in his case. In January 2019, an immigration officer declared him inadmissible under Section 34 of the IRPA, covering terrorism and subversion of democracy.
While the Immigration Division initially ruled in his favour in 2020, the minister appealed with new evidence, and on March 25, 2024, the IAD overturned the decision, finding that the PDP engaged in acts of subversion and terrorism. Mere membership, it said, was enough to trigger inadmissibility.
Justice Ngo upheld that conclusion, citing evidence of ballot stuffing, voter intimidation, and killings during the PDP-controlled 2003 and 2004 elections, when former President Olusegun Obasanjo and then Vice-President Atiku Abubakar were in power.
The court ruled that undermining even flawed Nigerian elections for political gain met Canada’s legal definition of subversion of a democratic process. It also reaffirmed Canada’s broad interpretation of “membership” in a proscribed organisation, requiring no proof of personal complicity.
Other cases
The decision follows similar cases in which Nigerians with past affiliations to political parties or the police were denied asylum.
In February 2025, a Canadian court in Ottawa denied asylum to retired Nigerian police officer Wale Akinpelu, citing human rights violations by the force. His wife’s claim was also rejected.
In November 2024, a Canadian court in Toronto declined the asylum application of PDP member Adams Omozakari Ayonote, citing inconsistencies in his claim of persecution.
Analysts differ on ruling’s impact
An Abuja-based lawyer, Gabriel Egbule Jnr, said the ruling reflects the global perception of both parties’ electoral misconduct.
“This is a warning to all the institutions involved in the electoral process; the whole world is watching,” he said.
Former NNPC Ltd corporate communications chief, Olufemi Soneye, warned of damaging consequences for Nigeria’s image abroad.
He criticised the ruling for barring Egharevba without evidence of personal wrongdoing, calling it a dangerous precedent.
“Canada has long been a champion of democratic values abroad. This ruling contradicts that legacy. It must be revisited, challenged, and corrected, not just for Nigeria’s sake, but for the integrity of democratic politics everywhere. If this precedent stands, no political party, in any country, is safe from being redefined into illegitimacy by a foreign court,” he said.
“One immediate consequence is that law-abiding Nigerian youths could be branded ‘terrorist’ solely for past or present affiliation with the APC or PDP. This could lead to visa denials, asylum rejections, or travel scrutiny, discouraging political participation among young people,” he said.
He added that the immigration laws of the US and Canada allow for inadmissibility based on membership in a group deemed terrorist. This creates a real risk of collateral stigma for young people whose involvement was purely civic.
The prospect of visa denials, asylum rejections, or routine travel scrutiny will chill legitimate political participation among youths who are the lifeblood of party renewal. Far from strengthening democracy, such deterrence erodes pluralism by pushing emerging voices out of mainstream politics.”
