SERAP APPEALS COURT JUDGMENT AWARDING N100M DAMAGES TO DSS OFFICIALS, SEEKS STAY OF EXECUTION

Read Time:2 Minute, 11 Second

The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has filed an appeal against the judgment of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja, which ordered the organisation to pay ₦100 million in damages to officials of the Department of State Services (DSS), describing the ruling as “a travesty and a miscarriage of justice.”

The appeal follows a judgment delivered on 5 May 2026 by Justice Yusuf Halilu, who also ordered SERAP to publish public apologies, pay ₦1 million in costs, and incur a 10 per cent post-judgment interest until full payment of the damages.

In the appeal filed on 8 May 2026 through its counsel, Tayo Oyetibo, SERAP is asking the Court of Appeal to set aside the entire judgment and dismiss the substantive suit for lacking merit.

SERAP also filed an application seeking a stay of execution of the judgment pending appeal, arguing that enforcement of the ruling would severely disrupt its operations and undermine public interest advocacy.

The case, instituted by DSS officials Sarah John and Gabriel Ogundele, arose from alleged defamatory publications attributed to SERAP.

In its Notice of Appeal, SERAP argued that the trial court’s decision was “perverse and a nullity,” alleging that it was based on fundamental legal and evidential errors, including reliance on what it described as defective witness statements and improper evaluation of identification in defamation law.

The organisation further contended that the court lacked jurisdiction, arguing that the original suit was filed against a non-juristic entity before being amended, which it claims could not be cured by subsequent substitution.

SERAP also challenged the judgment on grounds that the alleged defamatory statements did not specifically identify the claimants and that the trial court wrongly relied on subjective perception rather than the objective test required under defamation law.

It further argued that the DSS officials failed to demonstrate reputational harm, financial loss, or any measurable injury resulting from the publications.

The rights group is also urging the appellate court to recognise defences of justification, fair comment, and qualified privilege, insisting that its publications were made in the public interest.

In its application for stay of execution, SERAP warned that enforcing the judgment could cripple its operations, affect staff and partners, and halt ongoing human rights interventions across the country.

SERAP maintained that it remains committed to pursuing the appeal and stressed that the case raises broader concerns about civic space, freedom of expression, and the ability of civil society organisations to operate without undue restriction.

The Court of Appeal is expected to determine both the appeal and the application for stay in due course.