The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) informed a Federal Capital Territory High Court that officials from Nigeria’s Department of State Services (DSS) who entered their Abuja office on 9th September allegedly used false names and arrived in two unmarked vehicles.
SERAP, a prominent human rights organization, stated that this unannounced visit was in response to its recent call urging President Bola Tinubu to investigate alleged corruption within the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) and reverse the recent petrol price hike.
Recall that SERAP had in September alleged that the DSS invaded its Abuja office.
The DSS then released a statement asserting that the visit to SERAP’s office was “a routine investigation”, but two of its officials later filed a defamation lawsuit against SERAP, seeking over N5 billion in damages.
Senior advocates Tayo Oyetibo and Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, representing SERAP, filed a defence in court detailing that one DSS official, posing as “Sarah David,” concealed her true identity. They argued that the DSS’ approach reflected “bad faith and sinister motives.”
The filing claimed that DSS operatives entered SERAP’s office demanding access to management staff, requested documents, and subjected the front desk officer to questioning.
It further noted that, despite DSS’ claims of conducting routine operations, the agency has no customary practice of liaising with non-governmental organizations for any social or operational purposes.
The statement highlighted several contradictory explanations provided by DSS regarding the purpose of their visit.
While DSS initially referred to it as part of routine engagement with NGO leadership, SERAP maintained that it had no “new leadership” to necessitate such an approach.
Additionally, the DSS visit was reportedly conducted without any formal invitation, contrasting with standard procedure for inter-agency communication with NGOs.
Further allegations in the statement asserted that one DSS operative remained in constant contact with colleagues stationed outside the office, supposedly waiting for a signal to enter.
This scenario reportedly caused distress among SERAP’s employees, who feared an imminent raid.
SERAP claimed in court that the DSS agents’ actions amounted to “harassment, intimidation, and psychological trauma” inflicted upon its staff. It also denied DSS’s assertions that it had recorded conversations during the visit, demanding strict proof.
The defence argued that the DSS’s defamation claim lacks merit since SERAP’s public statement did not disclose the officials’ names, nor could the descriptions of “a tall, large, dark-skinned woman and a slim, dark-skinned man” be conclusively linked to the plaintiffs.
SERAP reiterated its commitment to defending the truth of its statement and intends to contest the DSS’s claims at trial.
Justice Yusuf Halilu adjourned the case to 29th November 2024 for further hearing.
