The All Progressives Congress (APC) has dismissed media reports claiming that a Canadian court declared the party a terrorist organisation, describing the publications as “false, misleading, and mischievous.”In a statement signed by the party’s National Publicity Secretary, Felix Morka, APC clarified that the decision of the Canadian Federal Court in the case of Douglas Egharevba vs. Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness made no such declaration.
Click Here to Join Our Whatsapp Channel
The case involved an application for judicial review by Egharevba, who challenged a ruling of the Canadian Immigration Appeal Division (IAD) declaring him inadmissible to Canada under its Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA).
The court upheld the IAD’s decision on the grounds that the applicant was a member of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), which it found to have engaged in acts of subversion against democratic processes.The ruling, delivered by Justice Phuong T.V. Ngo on June 17, 2025, noted that the IAD’s findings on subversion were reasonable.
The judge specifically stated:> “Having found that the IAD’s analysis on subversion was reasonable, this is sufficient to dismiss the application for review. I will therefore refrain from analyzing the IAD’s findings on terrorism.”APC stressed that the only mention of its name in the 16-page judgment appeared in the “Background” section, where the applicant claimed he was a member of the party from December 2007 to May 2017.
However, the APC pointed out that it was formally registered in 2013, making the applicant’s claim factually impossible.“The court never made any determination on terrorism in relation to the APC.
Any reports to the contrary are entirely untrue and amount to deliberate mischief,” Morka said.The ruling, according to the APC, did not involve the party as a litigant and had no jurisdictional or extraterritorial basis to pass judgment on it.The party urged its members, supporters, and the public to disregard the reports, describing them as “a gross distortion of the facts and intent of the court’s decision.”
