The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has approached the Court of Appeal to challenge the N100 million defamation judgment awarded against it and its Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare, in a suit filed by two officials of the Department of State Services (DSS).
The appeal follows the May 5, 2026 judgment delivered by Justice Yusuf Halilu of the Federal Capital Territory High Court, which ordered SERAP and Oluwadare to pay damages to DSS officials Sarah John and Gabriel Ogundele over alleged defamatory publications.
The court also directed the organisation to issue public apologies, pay N1 million as litigation costs and a 10 per cent annual post-judgment interest on the damages until full payment.
SERAP, through its lawyer, Tayo Oyetibo (SAN), filed a notice of appeal on May 8 alongside an application seeking a stay of execution pending the determination of the appeal.
In the appeal documents, the organisation argued that the judgment was riddled with legal and procedural errors.
“The decision rests on fundamental legal and evidential errors that go to the root of jurisdiction and fairness in adjudication. The court’s decision is therefore perverse and a nullity,” SERAP stated.
The organisation faulted the trial court for allegedly relying on defective evidence, including a witness statement it claimed was not sworn before a Commissioner for Oaths.
“It stated that ‘the trial court relied on defective evidence, including a witness statement that was not sworn before a Commissioner for Oaths, which ought to have been discountenanced. The court’s reliance on such evidence substantially affected the outcome of the case.’”
SERAP is asking the appellate court to overturn the entire judgment and dismiss the suit filed against it.
The group is seeking “an order allowing the appeal; an order setting aside the entire judgment of the High Court of the FCT delivered on 5 May 2026; and an order dismissing the substantive suit (CV/4547/2024) in its entirety for lacking merit.”
Among several grounds of appeal, SERAP argued that the original suit was fundamentally defective because it was initially filed against “Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project,” which it described as a non-juristic entity.
According to the organisation, the subsequent amendment substituting the name with the Incorporated Trustees of SERAP could not cure what it termed a void originating process.
“An action commenced against a non-juristic person is fundamentally defective and does not constitute a misnomer which is capable of amendment,” the notice read.
SERAP further contended that the court wrongly concluded that the publications referred personally to the DSS officials, insisting that the reports neither mentioned their names nor contained identifiable details linking them directly to the publications.
“The publications complained of did not mention the respondents by name, rank, photograph, or any unique identifier,” it argued.
The organisation also maintained that the lower court failed to consider evidence showing that the publications were directed at the DSS as an institution rather than the claimants as individuals.
SERAP argued that it acted within the bounds of fair comment, qualified privilege and justification, noting that the publications were based on what it described as an unannounced visit by DSS operatives who allegedly concealed their identities and refused to provide identification.
“There was also evidence that the publications were made by SERAP on an occasion of qualified privilege to inform the public about actions of state security agencies that reasonably appear intrusive and intimidating,” the appeal stated.
The organisation further faulted the award of damages, arguing that the DSS officials failed to prove reputational injury or actual losses arising from the publications.
“The respondents called no witness from the general public or any right thinking member of society to testify that the publications were understood to refer personally to the claimants or that their reputations had been lowered thereby,” it added.
In its motion for stay of execution, SERAP urged the appellate court to halt enforcement of the judgment pending the outcome of the appeal.
The organisation is seeking “an order staying the execution/enforcement of the orders made in the judgment of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory Abuja, delivered by Justice Yusuf Halilu, on 5th May, 2026, by whatever means, pending the final determination of the appeal.”
