The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has rejected a Federal Capital Territory High Court judgment ordering it to pay N100 million in damages to two officials of the Department of State Services (DSS), describing the decision as a threat to civic space and vowing to challenge it on appeal.……
The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has rejected a Federal Capital Territory High Court judgment ordering it to pay N100 million in damages to two officials of the Department of State Services (DSS), describing the decision as a threat to civic space and vowing to challenge it on appeal.
Justice Yusuf Halilu of the FCT High Court, Abuja, had ruled in favour of the DSS officials in a N5.5 billion defamation suit, directing SERAP to also issue public apologies, pay N1 million in litigation costs, and a 10 per cent annual post-judgment interest on the damages until fully settled.
Reacting in a statement posted on its X handle on Tuesday, May 5, SERAP said it had instructed its lawyers to immediately file an appeal against what it termed a flawed ruling.
“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,” the organisation said.
....: BREAKING: Court Awards N100million Damages Against SERAP
SERAP added, “We have instructed our lawyers Tayo Oyetibo, SAN and Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN to immediately appeal this judgment.”
The group described the suit as a strategic attempt to silence civil society, insisting that the ruling could have wider implications for freedom of expression and public accountability in the country.
“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,” it said.
“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.”
SERAP argued that the judgment failed to reflect evidence presented before the court and undermines constitutional and international protections for free speech.
“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,” it stated.
“This judgment sends a dangerous message and creates a chilling effect on freedom of expression, civic participation, and anti-corruption work.”
The organisation further maintained that defamation laws should not be used to stifle dissent, warning of broader consequences for democratic accountability.
“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.”
SERAP also linked the dispute to its advocacy on alleged corruption involving the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited, accusing the government of failing to investigate its claims.
“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,” it said.
“The Tinubu government has continued to fail to investigate the allegations of corruption our organization raised against the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL).”
The lawsuit stemmed from a September 9, 2024 incident, when SERAP alleged that DSS officials unlawfully entered its Abuja office following its call on Bola Ahmed Tinubu to probe corruption allegations in the oil company and reverse fuel price increases.
In its defence before the court, SERAP denied the claims by the DSS officials, insisting its publication was directed at the agency and not individuals, and described the suit as “frivolous and vexatious.”
The organisation alleged that the officials’ visit involved demands for documents and questioning of staff, which it characterised as intimidation, while also pointing to alleged inconsistencies in the DSS account of the incident.
Despite the ruling, SERAP said it would pursue all legal options to overturn the judgment and continue its 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.”
