By Synthesis Ibeh
A former Nigerian lawmaker, Douglas Egharevba, is set to be deported from Canada after the country’s Federal Court upheld a decision branding Nigeria’s two dominant political parties the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) as organisations associated with terrorism and the undermining of democratic governance.
In a judgment delivered on June 17, 2025, Justice Phuong Ngo dismissed Egharevba’s appeal against a ruling by Canada’s Immigration Appeal Division (IAD). The IAD had earlier declared him inadmissible under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA), citing his long-standing membership in the APC and PDP, which authorities claim have a history of political violence and election-related subversion.
Canadian officials argued that leaders of both parties have benefited from systemic violence, voter intimidation, and electoral malpractice while failing to curb such actions. Egharevba who was in the PDP from 1999 to 2007 before crossing to the APC until 2017 maintained he had no personal involvement in wrongdoing. However, the court found that his affiliation with the parties during periods of documented political unrest was sufficient grounds for deportation, regardless of direct participation.
The case placed particular emphasis on the PDP’s role during the controversial 2003 state elections and the 2004 local government polls under former President Olusegun Obasanjo. Findings indicated that party operatives engaged in ballot stuffing, harassment of voters, and the killing of opposition members, activities allegedly tolerated by its leadership.
Justice Ngo clarified that, under Canadian law, subversion of a democratic process includes seeking political advantage through unlawful methods even without the use of physical force and that membership in such an organisation alone can justify inadmissibility.
Egharevba’s argument that all Nigerian political parties were guilty of similar conduct failed to sway the court, which maintained that Nigeria’s elections, despite imperfections, are legally recognised democratic exercises, and disrupting them amounts to subversion.