SERAP Challenges Abuja Court’s N100m Award to DSS Officials
The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has formally challenged a N100 million defamation judgment delivered against it by the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, filing an appeal at the Court of Appeal and simultaneously seeking a stay of execution pending the outcome of the case.
In a statement issued on Tuesday and attributed to SERAP Deputy Director Kolawole Oluwadare, the civil society organisation confirmed that the appeal was filed on Friday by Senior Advocate of Nigeria Tayo Oyetibo, targeting the May 5, 2026 ruling delivered by Justice Yusuf Halilu of the FCT High Court.
The judgment had awarded N100 million in damages to two Department of State Services (DSS) officials, Sarah John and Gabriel Ogundele, over publications SERAP made that the officials alleged were defamatory. Beyond the damages, Justice Halilu also ordered SERAP to publish public apologies, pay N1 million in litigation costs, and bear a 10 per cent annual post-judgment interest on the total award until fully settled.
SERAP described the ruling as “a travesty and miscarriage of justice,” maintaining that the judgment was both legally and procedurally flawed.
In its grounds of appeal, the organisation argued that the trial court misapplied established legal principles on defamation identification, contending that the publications did not specifically or uniquely identify the individual claimants. SERAP cited Supreme Court precedents in Ologe v. New Africa Holdings Ltd and Abalaka v. Akinsete, arguing that the lower court was required to apply an objective test to determine whether right-thinking members of society generally would understand the words as referring to the claimants personally, rather than relying on the subjective perception of the DSS officials and their colleagues.
“The lower court erroneously relied on the subjective perception of the respondents and their colleagues within the Department of State Services,” the notice of appeal stated, according to the organisation’s statement.
SERAP also challenged the evidentiary basis of the judgment, arguing that the trial court relied on a witness statement allegedly not sworn before a Commissioner for Oaths. The organisation further argued that its defences of justification, qualified privilege, and fair comment were wrongly dismissed, insisting that the publications were substantially true and made in the public interest.
On the question of standing, SERAP argued that the DSS officials had no legal basis to bring the suit as individuals, noting that the words complained of did not specifically identify them within a large institution. “The DSS is a large institution, and the words complained of did not specifically, directly, or uniquely identify the respondents,” the appeal stated.
SERAP is asking the Court of Appeal to set aside the entire judgment and dismiss the underlying suit for lacking merit.
In its separate application for a stay of execution, the organisation warned that enforcing the judgment while the appeal is pending could cripple its operations and undermine ongoing human rights and accountability programmes across Nigeria.
“Thousands of individuals and communities depend on SERAP’s work, including victims of human rights violations and beneficiaries of its advocacy, investigations, and legal interventions,” the organisation stated. “Halting our operations would have far-reaching consequences for public interest work and access to justice in Nigeria.”
SERAP also noted that it would amend its notice of appeal after obtaining the Certified True Copy of the judgment to include additional grounds highlighting what it described as further defects in the ruling.
The case has drawn attention beyond the immediate parties, with observers noting its broader implications for civil society operations and the legal boundaries of public interest reporting and advocacy in Nigeria.