How Will APC Prove It’s Not a Terrorist Organization? Party Faces Renewed Scrutiny Amid Controversies
The All Progressives Congress (APC), Nigeria’s ruling party, is under fire once again as accusations of terrorist-like behavior resurface, prompting questions about how it can demonstrate its legitimacy amid legal and political storms. A recent Canadian court ruling labeling the APC—and its rival, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP)—as terrorist organizations for immigration purposes has been rejected by both parties, but it has fueled domestic critics who point to incidents like the alleged attack on a Lagos church. As the APC navigates these claims ahead of the 2027 elections, the party must counter perceptions of complicity in violence and corruption to maintain its grip on power. This ongoing saga raises broader concerns about political accountability in Africa’s most populous nation.
Trending: APC ‘Terrorist’ Label Sparks Outrage and Defiance on Social Media
The controversy has dominated online discourse, with hashtags like #APCTerrorist and #CanadianCourtRuling trending on X since mid-August 2025. Posts range from satirical memes mocking the APC’s response to serious calls for investigations into party-linked violence, amassing millions of views. One viral thread questioned, “If a foreign court sees APC as terrorists, how will Nigerians feel safe?” while APC supporters counter with #FakeNews, dismissing the claims as opposition propaganda. The debate has spilled into real-world protests, amplifying tensions in a year marked by economic hardship and insecurity.
Key Details of the Accusations and Responses
The flashpoint originated from a June 17, 2025, ruling by Canada’s Federal Court in an immigration case involving a Nigerian applicant, where Justice Henry Brown classified both the APC and PDP as terrorist organizations to deny the claimant’s refugee status. The decision argued that the parties’ alleged involvement in electoral violence and corruption equated to terrorist activities under Canadian law, but it was specific to the case and not a global designation.
Both parties swiftly rejected the ruling. On August 15, 2025, the APC issued a statement clarifying that the court “did not declare APC a terrorist organization,” describing media reports as “erroneous” and the decision as lacking jurisdiction over Nigerian politics. The PDP echoed this, calling it a “shocking but baseless” judgment influenced by misinformation.
Domestically, the African Democratic Congress (ADC) escalated the rhetoric on September 5, 2025, accusing the APC of “acting like a terrorist organization” after an attack on a Deeper Life Bible Church in Lagos, where gunmen killed two worshippers. The ADC linked the incident to APC-orchestrated thuggery, demanding an investigation. The APC has denied involvement, attributing it to criminal elements amid rising insecurity.
To prove its non-terrorist status, the APC could pursue legal challenges, enhance transparency in party activities, and distance itself from violence through public condemnations and support for probes. However, critics argue that ongoing allegations of electoral malpractice and ties to banditry in the North undermine these efforts.
Quotes from Key Figures
APC National Publicity Secretary Felix Morka stated on August 15, 2025: “The Canadian court never made any such declaration against APC. This is a deliberate distortion by mischief-makers to tarnish our image.” PDP’s Debo Ologunagba added: “We reject this judgment in its entirety; it’s an affront to Nigerian democracy.”
Human rights lawyer Femi Falana urged both parties on August 18, 2025: “Challenge the court on this terrorist organizations tag. If it’s baseless, seek an appeal or injunction to clear your names internationally.” ADC National Chairman Ralph Nwosu, regarding the Lagos attack, said: “APC is acting like a terrorist organisation, intimidating opposition and civilians alike.”
Background: From Immigration Case to Political Weapon
The Canadian ruling stemmed from a refugee claim by a Nigerian alleging persecution by political thugs linked to the APC and PDP during elections. Justice Brown cited reports of vote-buying, intimidation, and violence as evidence of “terrorist” patterns, drawing on international assessments of Nigeria’s electoral flaws. While not binding globally, it embarrassed both parties, especially the APC under President Tinubu, who assumed office in 2023 amid similar accusations.
Nigeria’s political scene has long been marred by violence, with the APC and PDP dominating since 1999. The APC, formed in 2013 as a merger of opposition groups, ended PDP’s 16-year rule in 2015 but has faced criticism for failing to curb insecurity, including Boko Haram and banditry—groups unrelated to the party but sometimes politically exploited. The Lagos church attack fits a pattern of pre-election tensions, with 2023 polls seeing over 100 deaths from violence.
Falana’s advice to challenge the ruling highlights a path forward, but both parties have so far opted for public denials rather than legal action, possibly to avoid drawing more attention.
Possible Impact and Next Steps
The “terrorist” label, even if limited, could harm the APC’s international image, complicating diaspora engagements and foreign aid ties. Domestically, it bolsters opposition narratives ahead of 2027, potentially eroding voter trust in a region where insecurity tops concerns. For the PDP, it’s a shared embarrassment but an opportunity to unite against the ruling party.
Next steps include potential appeals in Canada, as suggested by Falana, or diplomatic protests via Nigeria’s foreign ministry. The APC may ramp up anti-violence campaigns and support investigations into incidents like the Lagos attack to rebuild credibility. With elections looming, expect more rhetorical battles, but concrete actions—like transparent funding and disavowing thugs—could help the APC prove its democratic credentials. Security agencies are urged to probe party-linked violence to de-escalate tensions.
Conclusion: A Test of Credibility for Nigeria’s Ruling Party
The APC’s challenge to prove it’s not a terrorist organization amid the Canadian ruling and domestic accusations boils down to actions over words: transparent governance, swift justice for violence, and legal rebuttals. As critics like the ADC intensify scrutiny, the party’s response will shape its 2027 prospects and Nigeria’s democratic health. For observers, the takeaway is the fragility of political trust—where foreign judgments and local tragedies can amplify doubts, underscoring the need for accountability to silence the naysayers once and for all.