Canadian court labels PDP, APC as terrorist, anti-democracy groups in landmark ruling

In a judgment that has sent shockwaves through Nigeria’s political landscape, the Federal Court of Canada has upheld a ruling branding the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the All Progressives Congress (APC) as organizations involved in terrorism and the subversion of democracy.

Justice Phuong T.V. Ngo delivered the precedent-setting decision while rejecting the asylum application of Douglas Egharevba, a Nigerian politician and acknowledged PDP member.

According to Sahara Reporters, the court found that Egharevba’s affiliation with the PDP made him automatically inadmissible to Canada under paragraph 34(1)(f) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA), which bars individuals linked to organizations deemed to promote terrorism or undermine democratic governance.

The court affirmed findings by the Immigration Appeal Division (IAD) that both PDP and APC have been involved in political violence, intimidation of voters, ballot stuffing, and even killings to secure power.

Justice Ngo quoted the IAD’s conclusion: “The conduct of individuals who are members of the PDP, which includes violence, murder, ballot-stuffing, ballot box snatching, intimidation of voters, and other unlawful acts, is too widespread and persistent over too great a period of time to dissociate the leadership of the party from their actions.”

The court further agreed that the actions of both parties meet the Canadian legal definition of terrorism, as they were intended to “intimidate the public or a segment of the public… for a political objective.”

While acknowledging that both parties engaged in misconduct, the IAD determined that the PDP was responsible for the majority of these acts and reaped the greatest benefit, particularly during its 16 years in power.

 “Although other parties have committed unlawful acts to further their political goals, the PDP committed the majority of the acts and benefited from them more than any other party,” the ruling noted.

Egharevba admitted his PDP membership but denied any personal involvement in violent activities. The court stressed that Canadian immigration law does not require proof of individual wrongdoing if the organization is linked to terrorism. “Once membership is established or admitted, then it is membership for all purposes. The Applicant’s admission that he was a member of the PDP was determinative,” Justice Ngo wrote.

Egharevba also argued that political violence in Nigeria is systemic and forms part of the accepted “rules of the game,” claiming this negates the notion of subverting democratic institutions. The court dismissed the reasoning as circular. “It would be circular to consider that elections marred by irregularities cannot qualify as a democratic institution or process… The fact that there was subversion would have the effect of denying the very possibility of recognizing subversion, which would be paradoxical,” Justice Ngo stated.

The court upheld the IAD’s decision as “transparent, intelligible and justifiable” and declined to certify a legal question, effectively closing Egharevba’s asylum options unless another appeal path emerges.

This ruling stands as one of the most explicit foreign judicial findings linking Nigeria’s two dominant political parties to systemic violence, terrorism, and electoral manipulation and firmly rejecting the idea that such practices are politically “normal.”