A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, has faulted the judgement delivered in the N5.5 billion defamation suit involving the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, SERAP, describing it as inconsistent with established legal principles.
Reacting to the ruling, Adegboruwa, who is one of the lawyers in the case, said the judgement failed to reflect critical legal arguments presented before the court.
“The judgement did not reflect the legal arguments canvassed in the case, especially on the legal status of DSS as to whether the agency established by law is DSS or SSS,” he stated.
Court ignored key legal questions
The senior lawyer further argued that the judgement overlooked fundamental issues regarding whether public officers can institute defamation suits on behalf of their agencies.
“The court also did not consider the case of SERAP, as to whether public officers working in public institutions can sue for defamation on behalf of their organisations in respect of alleged wrong done to their agency in the course of discharge of their official duties,” Adegboruwa said.
He added that despite the plaintiffs admitting they were under investigation by their employers, the court still found SERAP guilty of libel.
“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,” he said.
Damages awarded ‘bizarre’
Adegboruwa described the N100 million damages awarded as excessive and unjustified, further fueling the judgement controversy.
“In all cases, damages for libel should be commensurate with the status and earnings of the plaintiff. In this case, public officers of DSS who did not even establish their ranks or salary scales before the court were awarded N100M as bazaar! How much is their monthly salary?” he queried.
He also questioned the legitimacy of awarding interest on the damages. “The judge also awarded interest at 10% on the damages awarded when it was not a contract and no case for interest was proved by the plaintiffs before the court,” he said.
Threat to democracy, appeal underway
The SAN warned that the judgement appeal would be necessary to prevent what he described as a dangerous precedent for civil society organisations.
“The inconsistency and irony of this case is that the plaintiffs were sent on assignment with public funds and they turned around to sue to claim private damages from their public engagements. Now, who collects the damages, is it the plaintiffs or their employers?” he asked.
“It is a strange judgment that has no precedence and it is very dangerous for our democracy as it can be used to silence NGOs. We are taking immediate steps to appeal this judgment.”
The controversy surrounding the judgement continues to generate debate within legal and civil society circles, with the planned appeal expected
Earlier, SERAP rejected the judgement as it described it as the “seriously flawed judgment” of the Federal Capital Territory High Court, Abuja, in the N5.5 billion defamation lawsuit filed against the organisation by two officials of the Department of State Services, DSS.
According to Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare in a statement, explained that Justice Yusuf Halilu of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory on Monday ordered SERAP to pay N100 million in damages to the DSS officials for alleged defamation. It added, the court also directed the organisation to issue public apologies, pay N1 million in litigation costs, and a 10 percent annual post-judgment interest on the damages until fully paid.
Reacting, SERAP in a statement said, “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 said, “We have instructed our lawyers Tayo Oyetibo, SAN and Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN to immediately appeal this judgment.”
The statement, read in part: “This case represents a textbook example of judicial harassment and a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP), designed to intimidate civil society and deter legitimate human rights advocacy.”
“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.”
“Rather than deploying state institutions to intimidate critics, the government should be protecting those working to expose corruption, including allegations involving the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited.”
“We strongly disagree with the judgment, which fails to reflect the evidence presented before the court and disregards Nigeria’s constitutional guarantees and international human rights obligations.”
“This judgment sends a dangerous message and creates a chilling effect on freedom of expression, civic participation, and anti-corruption work.”
“Strategic lawsuits against public participation undermine the rule of law by diverting judicial processes from their proper purpose—justice—to repression.”
“Courts have a duty to prevent the misuse of legal proceedings and to safeguard the rights to freedom of expression and association.”
“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.”
“We are committed to pursuing all available legal avenues, including appeal, to ensure that the rule of law is upheld and that fundamental rights are protected. We stand resolute. We will continue to defend civic space, promote transparency, and advance accountability in Nigeria.”
“Our work —particularly in promoting transparency, challenging corruption, and addressing illicit financial flows—is carried out in the public interest and in accordance with the law.”
“The Tinubu government has continued to fail to investigate the allegations of corruption our organization raised against the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL).”
“We call on Nigerian authorities to uphold their constitutional and international human rights obligations, including the duty to protect human rights defenders and ensure that security agencies operate lawfully, transparently, and accountably.”
The lawsuit arose after SERAP, on 9 September 2024, alleged that DSS officials unlawfully entered its Abuja office following the organisation’s call on President Tinubu to investigate corruption allegations in NNPCL and reverse fuel price increases.
SERAP’s statements of defence and statements on oath filed in court, read in part: “SERAP vehemently denies the claims by the DSS and its officials and at the trial shall urge the Court to dismiss the claims in their entirety for being frivolous and vexatious, with substantial costs in favour of SERAP.”
“One of the two DSS officials who entered SERAP’s office signed the visitor’s book as “Sarah David” and not “Sarah John” as constituted in this suit. A photocopy of the extract from the visitor’s book showing that the official hid her true identity when she entered SERAP’s premises is hereby pleaded and shall be relied upon during trial.”
“The DSS stormed SERAP’s office demanding to see its management staff, demanding official documents in addition to interrogating and questioning its front desk officer.”
“SERAP shall during the trial of this suit challenge the competence of this suit on various grounds of law.”
“The statement published by SERAP was directed to the DSS as Nigeria’s secret security agency which is notorious for various acts of harassment and intimidation of innocent citizens over the years, and not the DSS officials as claimed.”
“Upon arrival at SERAP’s office, the one DSS official parked her private car at the premises of SERAP in company of two unmarked vehicles occupied by some operatives of the DSS.”
“The DSS is not known to make social friends of NGOs dedicated to the promotion of human rights and accountability in Nigeria.”
“There is no new leadership in SERAP and that the normal practice for public institutions and law enforcement agencies including the DSS, when inviting NGOs to a meeting is to send letters of invitation to such organizations for record purposes.”
“On 17th September 2024 the DSS had, through their Solicitor, Dr Alex Izinyon SAN, written to SERAP in respect of this matter in which they stated that the publication of SERAP complained of in this Suit was made of and concerning the DSS, and not the two DSS officials.”
“By a letter dated 23rd day of September 2024, SERAP’s Solicitors Messrs Tayo Oyetibo LP rejected the demands of the DSS as contained in their Solicitor’s letter.”
“It was after the exchange of correspondence between the DSS and SERAP, that the two DSS officials instituted this Suit based upon false facts that the publication was made of and concerning them.”
“The DSS has made contradictory statements as to the purpose of their unannounced visit and presence in SERAP’s Abuja office.”
“The DSS in their public statement which was issued on 10th September 2024 confirmed that they visited SERAP’s office on 9th September 2024 ‘on a routine investigation’.”
“The purpose of the ‘visit’ to SERAP’s Abuja office as contained in the said public statement by the DSS is completely different from the purpose contained in paragraph 5 of the claimants’, to the effect that: ‘in line with its practice of engaging with officials of non-governmental organisations operating in the FCT to establish a relationship with their new leadership, it directed its two officials to visit SERAP’s office and invite its new leadership for a familiarisation meeting.’”
“SERAP does not have a front desk officer in its Abuja Office named ‘Ruth’ and as such puts the Claimants to the strictest proof of the same.”
“SERAP has received written invitations for partnerships and collaborations from many public institutions which SERAP has honoured and SERAP has a good working relationship with many public institutions in Nigeria, including the Bureau of Public Service Reform, Code of Conduct Bureau, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, National Human Rights Commission and Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission.”
“One of the two DSS officials requested to see the incorporation documents of SERAP from the front desk officer and when told that the incorporation documents are in the custody of management staff, she requested to see senior officers of SERAP present and when asked why, she repeated that she needs to verify the incorporation documents before leaving.”
“While in the Abuja office of SERAP, one of the two DSS officials received various phone calls from her colleagues stationed outside asking her for a signal to come in but she responded to the hearing of the front desk officer that the main people were not in the office and that they should remain stationed outside.”
“One of the two DSS officials specifically asked and queried the internal structure of SERAP while asking for the whereabouts of SERAP’s director in addition to inquiring about the location from which the director issues public statements, such as the statement issued on the alleged corruption and mismanagement in the operation of NNPCL and the increase by the NNPCL in the pump price of petrol.”
“When the interrogation got heated and out of hand, the front desk officer who was then visibly scared, harassed and intimidated by the presence of the one of the two DSS officials, and the questions, multiple calls received by her and her responses thereto, advised that an official letter be sent to SERAP.”
“Owing to the continuous and heated interrogation and improper interrogation tactics by the DSS official, and the presence of unmarked vehicles stationed outside the premises of SERAP, other staff present in the office were apprehensive and afraid, expecting an imminent raid by the operatives stationed outside the office.”
“The DSS official only left the office when the front desk officer promised her that a member of SERAP’s management staff or an assigned staff would visit the office of the DSS, hopefully, that day, 9/9/2024.”
“After the DSS official left SERAP’s Abuja Office, the front desk officer called SERAP deputy director and narrated her ordeal with the officials who had left the office, but still entertained fears they might return to arrest all staff, including herself.”
“After the DSS officials signed their names in the SERAP visitor’s book, their convoy remained stationed at our office. Consequently, SERAP released a tweet on X (formerly known as Twitter) urging President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to instruct the DSS to cease the harassment, intimidation, and unlawful occupation of its premises.”
“Following the tweet referenced above, various media outlets began arriving to monitor the situation at SERAP’s Abuja office. Upon noticing the presence of these media organizations, the DSS officials’ convoy promptly moved their unmarked vehicles further from SERAP’s premises and subsequently departed the area.”
“The actions of the DSS officials amount to harassment, intimidation, and ill-treatment and inflicted severe psychological torture and trauma on the staff members of SERAP to the extent that some staff in the employment of SERAP were reluctant to resume when directed to do so in fear of being arbitrarily arrested, harassed, intimidated and/or detained by the DSS.”
“DSS officials never recorded the conversation between them and the SERAP front desk officer as claimed and put the officials to the strictest proof of the same.”
“SERAP is a leading NGO in Nigeria advocating for the protection of human rights in Nigeria and it is loved by Nigerians for the organization’s good work and specifically pleads that its public statement published on 9/9/2024 is true and justified.”
“The DSS officials cannot claim to have sustained any injury as a result of the Defendants’ publication, as the said publication never mentioned their names but only described the officers who came to SERAP’s office.”
The suit number FCT/HC/CV/4547/24, was instituted by Sarah John and Gabriel Ogundele, both officials of the DSS.
