Senior Lawyer Backs Canadian Court’s Label of APC and PDP as ‘Terrorist’ Organisations

Stories by Steve Aya

A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, J.S. Okutepa, has weighed in firmly in support of a landmark Canadian court decision that classified Nigeria’s two major political parties, the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) and the opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) as terrorist organisations, in the context of an asylum case. Drawing on over 30 years of experience in electoral jurisprudence, Okutepa, SAN asserted that the court’s characterisation was “absolutely correct”, arguing that the actions of many Nigerian politicians go beyond democratic competition into the realm of political terrorism.

The Canadian Federal Court, in a judgement delivered on June 17, 2025, upheld a decision by Canada’s Immigration Appeal Division (IAD) which denied asylum to Douglas Egharevba, a former member of both the PDP and APC, on the grounds that mere affiliation with parties linked to political violence and subversion, meets the threshold of inadmissibility under Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA). The court cited evidence of ballot-stuffing, voter intimidation, and politically motivated killings tied to the PDP’s conduct in the 2003 State elections and 2004 local polls 

Okutepa, SAN, drawing from his own experience in electoral law, argued that the ruling resonates with the harsh realities of Nigerian politics. 

He lamented that democratic structures have been distorted into mechanisms of violence and coercion, noting that elections often involve State capture, manipulation of institutions, and post-poll judicial travesties. “The Nigerian brand of democracy is thuggery-prone… Electoral robberies have replaced democracy”, he said, highlighting how State institutions are subverted to legitimise brute power rather than popular will.

In contrast, the APC vehemently objected to the ruling. Its National Secretary labelled Justice Phuong Ngo as an “ignoramus”, arguing that the court had no jurisdiction to evaluate the legitimacy of Nigeria’s political parties, which it maintained are credible democratic institutions. Similarly, the PDP condemned the ruling as “misinformed, biased, and lacking evidence”, urging that such sweeping classification be dismissed outright. 

Beyond party lines, critics warned that the implications of the decision extend far beyond the immediate asylum appeal. Olufemi Soneye, a former NNPC communications chief, described the court’s ruling as a “political earthquake”, cautioning that it sets a dangerous precedent, one that risks stigmatising thousands of Nigerians abroad simply for past political affiliation. He warned of potential visa denials, heightened scrutiny, and the erosion of political pluralism, especially among Nigeria’s youth.

On the legal front, analysts noted that Canada’s IRPA allows for inadmissibility based on membership alone in an organisation associated with terrorism or subversion thus, perfectly aligning with how the court decided the Egharevba case, even absent direct evidence of personal wrongdoing..

As pressure builds, Nigeria’s Federal Government has yet to issue a formal response, though insiders indicate that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is verifying the ruling’s authenticity before crafting a measured diplomatic reply.

Okutepa, SAN, concluded with a call for introspection and reform: “Let our politicians admit that all is not well with our democracy”, he urged. “We must restore politics of ideals, decency, and service, rather than continue in this political quagmire.”