The Federal Government has condemned the recent ruling by a Canadian Federal Court, which classified certain Nigerian political parties as terrorist organisations, calling the decision reckless, unfounded, and an unacceptable interference in the country’s internal affairs.
This came as the African Democratic Congress (ADC) and Coalition of United Political Parties argued that the Canadian court ruling is being driven by reported cases of electoral malpractices and violence in the country.
The Canadian Federal Court, on June 17, 2025, delivered a ruling on an immigration case involving Douglas Egharevba, a former member of both the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the All Progressives Congress (APC).
Egharevba, who arrived in Canada in 2017 seeking refugee status, had applied for a judicial review of an earlier decision by Canada’s Immigration Appeal Division.
According to report, Justice Phuong Ngo dismissed his application, upholding the Appeal Division’s finding that Egharevba was inadmissible under the security provisions of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
In the landmark decision, the court sustained an earlier immigration tribunal ruling that classified both the APC and PDP as terrorist organisations, and consequently refused Egharevba asylum over his decade-long affiliation with the two parties.
Justice Ngo stated 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 a period of time to dissociate the leadership of the party from their actions.”
However, in its strongly-worded reaction, the Federal Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the Canadian court ruling as not only “baseless” and “reckless”, but also “an unacceptable interference in Nigeria’s internal affairs and democratic processes”.
In a statement signed by the spokesperson for the Ministry, Kimiebi Ebienfa, the government noted that the judgment failed to distinguish between individuals who might have committed offences and the broader membership of legitimate political entities.
“The court made a sweeping accusation against the entire membership of a political party that has produced three democratically elected presidents, instead of focusing on individuals found wanting.
“The larger ramification of the decision is that every member of the mentioned political parties is a potential terrorist, and that is completely false and unacceptable,” the statement noted.
FG emphasized that its political system was governed by a robust legal and constitutional framework and that all recognised political parties operated within the law.
The ministry called on Canadian authorities to immediately reverse the decision and avoid endorsing politically motivated narratives that misrepresented Nigeria’s political landscape.
“Nigeria is a sovereign nation with a robust legal and constitutional framework governing political activities. Our political parties operate within the ambit of the law and are integral to the country’s vibrant democracy.
“To associate legitimate political entities with terrorism without credible evidence is a grave misrepresentation that undermines Nigeria’s democratic institutions and could incite unnecessary tension.
“The Federal Government of Nigeria, therefore, calls on the Canadian authorities to immediately retract this erroneous designation and refrain from actions that could be misconstrued as endorsing politically motivated narratives against Nigeria.
“Diplomatic channels remain open for constructive dialogue, and we urge the Government of Canada to engage with the relevant Nigerian institutions to rectify this error,” said Ebienfa.
Reaffirming its stance against terrorism, FG highlighted its ongoing efforts to combat extremism and its commitment to global security cooperation.
It also urged the international community to disregard what it described as a misguided ruling.
Additionally, the government cautioned Nigerian citizens against misrepresenting the country to foreign governments in pursuit of asylum or immigration advantages.
The APC, however, dismissed the claims, noting that the Canadian court made no pronouncement on terrorism in its ruling.
In a statement on Friday, the APC’s National Publicity Secretary, Felix Morka, called on members of the ruling party to disregard the claims, describing them as false and misleading.
“We wish to state categorically that the Canadian court did not declare APC as a terrorist organization, contrary to highly erroneous media reports in circulation,” the Morka stated.
He added, “To be clear, the only reference to APC in the entire 16-page decision was in the introductory background, Paragraph 4, where the court referenced a Background Declaration Form in which the applicant stated that ‘he was a member of the People’s Democratic Party [PDP] of Nigeria from December 1999 until December 2007, and a member of the All Progressives Congress [APC] party of Nigeria from December 2007 until May 2017.
“For the record, APC was not in existence as of 2007. The party was registered in 2013. The applicant’s claim of membership of APC as of 2007 is evidently false as he could not have been a member of APC that didn’t exist at the time.
“For the avoidance of doubt, we make bold to state that the court never made any determination on the question of terrorism in its decision.”
The APC further noted that any such decision would have been entirely meaningless, as it would lack jurisdiction and held no extraterritorial relevance or legal effect.
However, both the African Democratic Congress and Coalition of United Political Parties argued that the court ruling was being driven by reported cases of electoral malpractices and violence in the country.
In an interview with Saturday PUNCH, the spokesperson for the ADC, Bolaji Abdullahi, said, “We don’t understand the full context of the case. But based on what we know, it would appear that the Canadian court had based its rulings on established cases of electoral malpractices.
“What this highlights is the seriousness with which other countries take the issue of rigging elections through violence or monetary inducement. Perhaps, under their law, this alone qualifies as acts of terrorism.
“It is our hope that these kinds of rulings will serve as deterrence going forward, especially as we head towards the 2027 election.
“We would also like to see individuals held responsible for their roles in rigging elections in the future rather than just the political parties.”
Also reacting, the National Secretary of the Coalition of United Political Parties, Peter Ameh, said the Canadian court linked the two leading political parties to acts of terror because they both held power in recent times in the country.
Ameh argued that even the various cases of violence and malpractices recorded at the 2023 general elections were demonstrations of terror and enough grounds for foreign bodies to label the political parties as terror organizations.
“Our elections are like war. And the reasons these two parties are identified as the people creating this vicious cycle of violence and thuggery is because they have held Federal power before,” Ameh said.
“In that light, they have used apparatus of the state to subdue opposing political parties, which has led to widespread malpractices in our electoral cycle.
“More so, those who applied such tactics have had the opportunity to manage the country and allow gunmen to run wild. So, these can form a perception of a leadership that encourages a certain level of violence.”
“Look at what happened in Lagos during the last election. People were beaten. A woman’s eye almost gushed out. There was also the Kogi experience. The level of violence in our electoral cycle is enough to be classified as acts of terror,” he added.
The Punch
