The Canadian Federal Court has upheld a decision preventing Nigerian politician Douglas Egharevba from entering Canada, ruling that his membership in the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), linked to systemic electoral violence renders him inadmissible under Canadian immigration law.
Justice Phuong T.V. Ngo affirmed a March 2024 ruling of the Immigration Appeal Division (IAD), which found that Egharevba’s affiliation with the PDP fell within section 34(1)(f) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA). That provision covers membership in organisations involved in terrorism or the subversion of democratic government.
In a strongly worded judgment, the court clarified that Canadian immigration law does not require proof of an individual’s direct involvement in political violence when the organisation they belong to has a proven record of such acts.
> “The evidence before the tribunal clearly demonstrated that the PDP, during the elections in which the applicant was a candidate, engaged in acts that subverted democratic processes, including ballot-stuffing, intimidation, and killings. Membership in such an organisation, in itself, constitutes reasonable grounds for a finding of inadmissibility,” the judge held.
Egharevba had argued that Nigerian elections were so flawed that they could not be considered “democratic” within the meaning of the law, and that any violence connected to them should not be treated as subversion of a democratic government.
But the court rejected this reasoning, finding that irregularities did not strip Nigerian elections of their democratic character.
“The IAD correctly concluded that while Nigerian elections may be marred by irregularities, they are still democratic in nature,” the ruling stated.
“Accordingly, acts of violence aimed at influencing the outcome of those elections amount to the subversion of a democratic government as contemplated by the Act.”
The court also backed the IAD’s reliance on reports from Human Rights Watch and other sources that documented the PDP’s role in political violence during the 2007 and 2011 elections.
“The applicant’s candidacy under the PDP banner placed him within the organisational framework responsible for these acts,” Justice Ngo noted. “The law requires no further evidence of his personal participation.”
The decision reaffirms a long-standing interpretation of Canadian immigration law: membership in a political organisation engaged in violent acts to undermine democracy can, by itself, justify inadmissibility.
Egharevba’s remaining legal options are narrow. Unless he secures leave to appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal, the ruling effectively ends his bid to enter Canada.
