The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, SERAP, has rejected the judgment of the Federal Capital Territory High Court, Abuja, which ordered it to pay ₦100 million in damages to two officials of the Department of State Services, DSS, over alleged defamation.
Justice Yusuf Halilu, on Tuesday, awarded the damages against SERAP in the ₦5.5 billion defamation suit filed by two DSS officials, Sarah John and Gabriel Ogundele.
The court also ordered SERAP to issue public apologies, pay ₦1 million as litigation cost, and pay 10 per cent annual post-judgment interest until the judgment sum is fully liquidated.
Reacting to the judgment, SERAP, in a statement on its official X handle, described the ruling as “totally unacceptable,” “seriously flawed,” and a “travesty.”
The organisation said the judgment amounted to a serious blow to civic space in Nigeria and reflected what it described as a troubling pattern of using defamation laws to punish legitimate criticism and suppress accountability.
“This judgment is totally unacceptable to us. It is a travesty and a serious blow to civic space in Nigeria. It reflects a troubling pattern under the government of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu of using defamation laws to punish legitimate criticism and suppress accountability,” SERAP stated.
SERAP said it had instructed its lawyers, Tayo Oyetibo, SAN, and Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN, to immediately file an appeal against the judgment.
According to the organisation, the suit was “a textbook example of judicial harassment and a strategic lawsuit against public participation,” otherwise known as SLAPP, allegedly designed to intimidate civil society and discourage legitimate human rights advocacy.
SERAP also accused the Federal Government of misusing state institutions to target critics, activists, journalists and citizens exercising their fundamental rights.
“The Tinubu government is misusing both the DSS and the judicial system to target activists, journalists, and ordinary Nigerians who are peacefully exercising their fundamental human rights,” the organisation said.
It argued that the judgment failed to reflect the evidence before the court and ignored constitutional and international human rights protections.
SERAP warned that the ruling could create a chilling effect on freedom of expression, civic participation and anti-corruption advocacy in Nigeria.
“The judgment raises serious concerns regarding compliance with international human rights law. Judicial authorities must ensure that defamation laws are not weaponised to silence dissent or suppress legitimate advocacy,” it added.
One of SERAP’s lawyers, Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN, also faulted the judgment, saying it did not reflect the legal arguments canvassed before the court.
Adegboruwa said the court failed to properly consider key questions raised in the case, including the legal status of the security agency and whether the agency established by law is the DSS or the SSS.
He also said the court did not address SERAP’s argument on whether public officers working in public institutions could sue for defamation on behalf of their organisations over alleged wrongs done to the agency in the course of official duties.
According to him, the plaintiffs had stated before the court that they were still under investigation by their employers to determine the propriety of their conduct at SERAP’s office, yet the court proceeded to hold SERAP liable for libel without actual proof of the identity of the persons allegedly defamed.
“Whereas the plaintiffs stated before the court that they are still under investigation by their employers to determine the propriety of their conduct in SERAP office, the judge proceeded to adjudge SERAP guilty of libel without actual proof of the identity of the persons allegedly defamed,” Adegboruwa said.
He also faulted the award of ₦100 million damages, arguing that damages for libel should be commensurate with the status and earnings of the plaintiffs.
According to him, the plaintiffs, who are public officers of the DSS, did not establish their ranks or salary scales before the court.