APC insists that the Canadian court did not declare a terrorist organization

APC insists that the Canadian court did not declare a terrorist organization

… .Says media reports Mischivous

Abuja (Core reporter) The Dugging All Progressive Congress (APC) dispelled requests from a media section that a Canadian Federal Court would have declared a terrorist organization, the report of basic journalists.

According to a declaration by his secretary of national advertising, Felix Morka, Friday, who was made available to basic journalists, said APC, the declaration was presumably made in the case of Douglas Egharevba and the Minister of Division Public Sickey and emergencies, in which the applicant (Douglas Egharevba) sought a judicial review of a decision by the Canadia Immigration Division Division [IAD] who established that the applicant was inadmissible in Canada pursuant to his law on immigration protection and refugees (Irpa).

The declaration states in some parts: “The attention of the All Progressives Congress (APC) was drawn from the media relations on a decision of a Canadian court that would have declared APC as a terrorist organization.

“We want to categorically affirm that the Canadian Court has not declared APC as a terrorist organization, contrary to the relationships of the highly incorrect media in circulation.

“As reported, the declaration was made in the case of Douglas Egharevba and the Minister of Public Security and the preparation for emergencies, in which the applicant (Douglas Egharevba) asked for a judicial review of a decision by the Canadian appeal division for Canadian immigration [IAD] who established that the applicant was inadmissible in Canada pursuant to his law on immigration protection and refugees (Irpa).

“In a decision on the subject dated 17 June 2025, judge Phuong TV NGO rejected the judicial review request for the fact that the applicant was a member of the Democratic Party of the people (PDP) and that the PDP was an organization engaged in subversion of paragraph 34 (1) (A.1) of the IRPA that made him in Canada.

“In his analysis, the judge said:” As such, by applying the revision standard of reasonableness, I cannot find the conclusion of the IAD according to which the elections in question constituted a democratic process or an institution and that the PDP, its members and supporters have engaged in subversive acts engaged against the electoral process for the improper purpose of maintaining political power to be irradiable. “

The declaration added to be clear, the only reference to the APC in the entire 16 -page decision was in the introductory “background”, paragraph 4, in which the Court referred to a “basic declaration module in which the applicant declared that” was a member of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) since December 2017.

“For the record, APC had not existed since 2007. The party was recorded in 2013. The affirmation of the applicant on the belonging to the APC since 2007 is evidently false as it could not have been a member of APC that did not exist at the moment.

“To avoid doubt, we will be daring to affirm that the Court has never determined any question about the question of terrorism in his decision. In the words of the judge:

“Having discovered that the analysis of the IAD on subversion was reasonable, this is sufficient to reject the demand for revision.” Therefore I will abstain from the analysis of the IAD discoveries on terrorism “.

In the declaration, Morka said that any relationship that APC was declared as a terrorist organization by the Canadian court in this matter is clearly incorrect, if not malice.

“The Court did not make such a declaration and could not have done it as it would be an unjustifiable overcoming, and a great violation of fair hearing, among the other right process rights, given that the APC was not part of the procedure. This decision would also have been of absolute irrelevance as being taken without jurisdiction and of any extraterritorial meaning.

“We urge our faithful party, supporters and all the Nigerians to ignore relationships as false and misleading.” The declaration concluded.