Citizen Egharevba and the bitter truth

“FOR we can do nothing against the truth, but for the truth.” 2 Corinthians 13:8. “Conscience is an open wound, only truth can heal it.” Uthman dan Fodio.

In the infamous years of military rule in Nigeria, the best mode of receiving news about the true state of affairs in Nigeria was to tune in to the British Broadcasting Service, Voice of America or any other foreign media. There was a massive crackdown on the media in Nigeria and it was no use listening to government-owned media outlets. In many States of the Federation presently, litigants prefer to take their cases to Courts established by the Constitution for the federal government, where they have a choice between those courts and the ones established for the States. There is a reasonable link between these two experiences. On June 17, 2025, a Federal Court in Canada delivered its decision in the case of Douglas Egharevba v The Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness. The facts of the case as narrated in the said decision are that:

‘The applicant, Douglas Egharevba [Applicant], seeks judicial review of a decision by the Immigration Appeal Division [IAD] dated March 25, 2024 [Decision]. The Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness [Minister] appealed the decision by the Immigration Division [ID] dated September 23, 2020, which determined that the Applicant was not subject to inadmissibility under paragraphs 34(1)(b.1), 34(1)(c), and 34(1)(f) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001, c 27 [IRPA]. The IAD reversed the ID’s decision and found that the evidence was established on reasonable grounds to believe that, pursuant to paragraph 34(1)(f) of the IRPA, the Applicant was a member of an organization that engages, has engaged, or will engage in acts of subversion against a democratic government, institution or process as they are understood in Canada [subversion] as contemplated by paragraph 34(1)(b.1), and terrorism under paragraph 34(1)(c) of the IRPA. As a result, the Applicant was found to be inadmissible to Canada pursuant to section 34 of the IRPA. For the reasons that follow, this application for judicial review is dismissed. I cannot conclude that the Decision is unreasonable.’

There are many issues thrown up by this case, ranging from failure of leadership, failure of governance and failure of citizenship. Today, many of our citizens are exiting their fatherland in droves, opting for menial jobs in foreign destinations as desperate means of survival. Under and by virtue of section 14 of the Constitution, the priority of the government should be the security and welfare of the people. Thus, the focal point of governance should be the safety, happiness and general well-being of the people. This will translate to the provision of durable infrastructure, initiating policies that encourage direct foreign investments and creating the enabling environment for local investors to thrive. In this regard, stable power supply is key to catapulting national economic growth, especially through the small-scale businesses, the production sector and indeed the service providers. Anticipating commercial disputes resulting from the investments attracted, a judicial system that is independent and well-funded is instituted to resolve such disputes within a reasonable time. Public schools and hospitals are well funded to render quality services to the general populace that may not have the financial muscle to attend the exclusive private entities established for profit. This is what is done in the jurisdictions where Citizen Douglas Egharevba and many other Nigerians are trooping to. However, these countries are now initiating more restrictive policies and legislations to discourage the influx of Nigerians and this will also reflect in the decisions handed down by their courts. For Nigeria, it is a case of failure of governance.

The concept of democracy developed from the jurisdictions where citizen Egharevba ran to revolved around the people. From the period of independence till now, those who wield political power in Nigeria have not embraced the true tenets of democracy in allowing the will of the people to prevail. The process of leadership recruitment, both internally within the political parties and externally during the general elections, have all been about imposition. There is a godfather somewhere, whose wish and will, must prevail, over those of the people. Those in power exercise maximum control over the institution created to organize the election and through sheer manipulation, unbridled violence, intimidation, thuggery and vote-buying, it becomes impossible to determine the real winner of elections. They then dare you to go to court, knowing that the onus on the loser of any election is one of the most difficult ones to discharge in Nigeria. Citizen Egharevba inadvertently exposed the failure of leadership in Nigeria to the whole world, as captured in the Canadian Court judgment.

‘In the Decision, the IAD noted that there was no evidence or allegations that the Applicant had personally engaged in terrorism or subversion. However, the IAD found that there were reasonable grounds to believe that the PDP engaged in terrorism and subversion of democratic institutions. The IAD concluded that the PDP engaged in political violence and subversion, including ballot stuffing, ballot box snatching, voter intimidation, violence, and murder of opposition supporters and candidates in the 2003 state elections and 2004 local elections [Elections]. The conduct of individuals who are members of the PDP, including high-ranking officials, and those who committed political violence and intimidation on their behalf is too widespread and persistent over too great a period of time to dissociate the leadership of the party from their actions. The Applicant’s membership to the PDP was sufficient to link him to these acts for the purpose of inadmissibility under paragraph 34(1)(f) of the IRPA. The IAD also found that the leadership had a high degree of control over its members, as evidenced by the Applicant’s testimony before the ID that he left the PDP because the leadership imposed their own candidate overriding the decision of the Applicant’s local ward. The IAD declined to make a finding on whether the Applicant is also inadmissible for his membership in the APC as the evidence on the PDP was sufficient and determinative.’

This case started in 2017 and dragged on till the final verdict was handed down in 2025. The jurisprudence of elections in Nigeria revolves around ‘substantial compliance’, focusing mostly on victory through majority of lawful votes secured at any electoral contest. Perhaps the Canadian Court should have extended an invitation to the political parties concerned or representatives of the Nigerian government even as amicus, being part of the Commonwealth of Nations. The discretion is however that of the presiding judge and it will all depend on the facts and circumstances. The truth however is that the facts presented before the court are those that we are all familiar with in Nigeria but perhaps not on such scale as to justify a blanket generalization. The reports from some of the latest bye-elections conducted on August 16, 2025 all corroborate those alluded to in the Canadian Court case. It is a failure of leadership.

In many respects, Citizen Egharevba represents the failure of citizenship. It may be true that there is some degree of frustration in the land due to failure of governance and failure of leadership but that cannot justify the desperation of many of our citizens. In this case, citizen Egharevba was an active member of the People’s Democratic Party, from 1999 to 2006 when that party held sway in Nigeria. He most probably did not join that political party because of any ideology but rather to capture power and for as long as the PDP was in power, he remained with the party with all its atrocities and vices as reflected in the findings of the Court. As soon as PDP lost power to the APC, he jumped ship and joined the APC, which is not really a different entity from the PDP. ‘The Applicant submitted a Background Declaration Form stating that he was a member of the People’s Democratic Party [PDP] of Nigeria from December 1999 until December 2007, and a member of the All People’s Congress [APC] party of Nigeria from December 2007 until May 2017.’ In the mind of Citizen Egharevba as with many other Nigerians, the primary goal of these declarations was that it would help facilitate the process of seeking asylum and running away from the crisis created by the failure of governance and of leadership. Here is a politician, who remained in politics for as long as it favoured his political party, crossed over to another political party as soon as his party lost power and when there was no other party to cross to, he decided to cross to another country, using his membership of these organizations, as the basis of his escape. The message from the Canadian Court to Citizen Egharevba is to join forces with other Nigerians to hold our leaders accountable to our people. It is not so rosy for those who have decided to remain in Nigeria but out of a sense of patriotism, knowing that they have no other country, they resolved to stand up to make it work for all.

From the responses of politicians to this judgment, many feel a sense of outrage that membership of a political party could turn them into terrorists, especially when they were not parties to the case. That is the law in Canada, just as there is a law in Nigeria that permits the government to proscribe IPOB, the Shiites and other organizations as terrorists. The important thing is to get the message from the Canadian Court that our leaders should develop Nigeria, make the land conducive for all and stop the mass exodus of our people to other nations. This message sank very well because it is coming from Canada. The judge who decided this case will have no reason to fear, did not solicit or receive any gratification and will not be subject to any harassment or intimidation by reason of the exercise of judicial authority. We all must continue to tell our leaders the bitter truth, even from the homeland. If we mean to practice democracy, then let us embrace the universal tenets of that laudable concept, including free, fair and credible elections.

READ ALSO: Citizen Okubajo’s allegations against policemen