Connect with us

Breaking News

DEFAMATION OF CHARACTER: SERAP On Appeal Against The ₦100m Judgment In Favour of DSS Officials

Published

on

The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project has filed an appeal against the ₦100 million defamation judgment delivered against it by the Federal Capital Territory High Court in Abuja in favour of officials of the Department of State Services.

In a statement issued on Tuesday by SERAP Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare, the organisation described the judgment delivered on May 5, 2026, by Justice Yusuf Halilu as “a travesty and a miscarriage of justice.”

According to SERAP, the appeal was filed on Friday, May 8, 2026, by senior advocate Tayo Oyetibo, alongside an application seeking a stay of execution pending the determination of the appeal.

SERAP stated, “The Notice of Appeal already filed will be amended upon receipt of the Certified True Copy of the judgment to incorporate key portions of the judgment that further highlight its flawed nature.”

The organisation added that the appeal and accompanying application for stay of execution provide “adequate legal protection” pending further proceedings.

Justice Halilu had ordered SERAP to pay ₦100 million in damages to DSS officials, Sarah John and Gabriel Ogundele, over publications made on SERAP’s X handle alleging that DSS operatives unlawfully occupied its Abuja office in September 2024.

The court also ordered the organisation to publish apologies on its website, in newspapers, and on television stations, in addition to paying ₦1 million litigation costs and 10 per cent annual post-judgment interest until full payment.

In its appeal, SERAP argued that the judgment was “legally defective, procedurally flawed, and unsupported by evidence.”

“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 further argued that the trial court relied on defective evidence, including a witness statement that it claimed was not sworn before a Commissioner for Oaths.

“The lower court erred in law by relying on the witness statement on oath of the 1st Respondent when the 1st Respondent admitted under cross-examination that the said statement was not sworn before a Commissioner for Oaths,” it said.

SERAP also challenged the court’s finding on defamation, arguing that the publications did not directly identify the DSS officials personally.

“The publications complained of did not mention the Respondents by name, rank, photograph, or any unique identifier,” the appeal read.

The organisation maintained that the trial court wrongly relied on the subjective perception of DSS personnel instead of applying the objective legal test required in defamation cases.
Related News

SERAP also argued that the lower court failed to uphold its defences of justification, qualified privilege, and fair comment.

“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,” it stated.

The organisation further claimed that the DSS officials failed to prove actual reputational or financial harm resulting from the publication.

“The Respondents did not adduce evidence of any suspension, investigation, disciplinary proceedings, or professional setback allegedly caused by the publications,” SERAP argued.

In its application for stay of execution, SERAP warned that enforcing the judgment could cripple its operations and disrupt ongoing human rights advocacy and accountability programmes.

“The effect of the decision of the Court is that the operations of SERAP, Nigeria’s foremost accountability non-profit organisation committed to the promotion of human rights, rule of law, transparency, and accountability in governance, will be severely disrupted, if not entirely shut down,” the organisation stated.

It added, “Thousands of individuals and communities depend on SERAP’s work, including victims of human rights violations and beneficiaries of its advocacy, investigations, and legal interventions.”

SERAP also argued that immediate enforcement of the judgment would affect its constitutional right to pursue an appeal.

“The enforcement of the judgment would deprive SERAP of its constitutional right of appeal, as it would be unable to adequately finance the prosecution of its appeal to the Court of Appeal,” it said.

The case originated from a suit filed by the DSS officials following posts published by SERAP on September 9, 2024, alleging that DSS officers unlawfully occupied its office and harassed its staff.

In his judgment, Justice Halilu held that the publication was defamatory and had psychologically affected the claimants.

“It is most necessary for care and due diligence to be taken by SERAP before tweeting or releasing any particular information with respect to the action of an agency of government for public consumption,” the judge had ruled.

Although the claimants initially sought ₦5 billion in damages, the court awarded ₦100 million instead, describing it as “a paltry sum.”

Read The Full Story / Watch The Full Video

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Breaking News

BUNKERING: Troops Uncover Suspected Illegal Refinery In Rivers, Recover Crude Oil Processing Equipment

Published

on

Troops have uncovered suspected illegal crude oil refining equipment during a patrol operation in the Orashi National Forest, Ahoada West Local Government Area of Rivers State.

The development was disclosed in a report by Zagazola Makama, a counter-insurgency and security expert covering the Lake Chad region.

According to the report, the discovery was made at about 12:00pm on Saturday by troops of the 16 Brigade Garrison at Abissa in collaboration with personnel of the 5 Battalion while carrying out anti-crude oil theft operations.

Makama reported that the troops discovered equipment believed to have been used for suspected illegal crude oil refining activities during the patrol.

Items recovered from the site included one large oven drum, one large coolant, two small oven drums, one small coolant, one long galvanised pipe and two sacks containing crude oil.

Makama said the recovered items were handled in line with the operational procedures guiding the ongoing anti-crude oil theft operations.

“The operation forms part of sustained efforts by security forces to dismantle illegal refining camps, curb crude oil theft and protect critical national assets in the Niger Delta region,” the report stated. …For more, Complete your reading.
You may like

Read The Full Story / Watch The Full Video

Continue Reading

Breaking News

US-Based Nigerian Seek Court To Set Aside Judgment

Published

on

A Nigerian-American engineer, Anthony Ehiedu Ugbebor, has asked the Court of Appeal to overturn the judgment of the Lagos High Court which declared that his property purchase agreement with a developer, Mr Olukayode Olusanya and Oak Homes Multinational Services Limited had been extinguished by the doctrine of novation.

The Lagos High Court had in the judgment ordered the refund of the N152 million Ugbebor paid for two luxury apartments in Victoria Island, Lagos.

In a Notice of Appeal filed by his counsel, Barrister Nasir Salau of Nasir Salau & Co., challenging the June 15, 2026 judgment delivered by Justice Akingbola George, Ugbebor argued that the trial judge misapplied settled principles of contract law, ignored material evidence, wrongly dismissed his counterclaim, and erroneously refused his claim for specific performance of the property sale agreement.

The appeal arose from Suit No. LD/4471LM/2023, instituted by property developer Olukayode Olusanya and Oak Homes against Ugbebor and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, over alleged trespass on two second-floor three-bedroom apartments located at 14A Musa Yar’Adua Street, Victoria Island, Lagos.

Although the Lagos High Court dismissed most of the developer’s claims, it held that the parties’ conduct had effectively terminated their original agreement through novation.

The court also ordered Olukayode and Oak Homes to refund the N152 million previously paid by Ugbebor, while dismissing the engineer’s counterclaim seeking completion and delivery of the apartments or, alternatively, damages.

Dissatisfied with those findings, Ugbebor asked the Court of Appeal to overturn the judgment, restore the validity of the original contract and compel Oak Homes to honour its obligations under the agreement

Ugbebor also urged the appellate court to set aside the judgment in its entirety, arguing that the Lagos High Court’s findings were contrary to the evidence and established legal principles governing contracts.

He maintained that the original agreement remained valid and enforceable and asked the Court of Appeal to compel Oak Homes to honour its contractual obligations.

One of his principal complaints is that the trial judge wrongly placed the burden of proving payment on him instead of the claimant.

According to the Notice of Appeal, the judge erred in holding that he failed to make payments within contractual timelines despite evidence that the payment structure under the agreement was tied to construction milestones rather than fixed dates.

The appellant argued that under the payment schedule contained in Exhibit CW1, 35 percent of the purchase price became payable upon completion of the roofing stage, while the final 20 per cent became payable only upon completion of the apartments.

He maintained that the agreement never required payment on fixed calendar dates and that he had already paid about 80 per cent of the agreed purchase price even though the developer allegedly failed to attain the contractual milestones.

According to him, the trial judge misconstrued the payment clauses and ignored the unchallenged testimony of the defence witness that substantial payments had been made despite the developer’s inability to complete the project as agreed.

He further argued that under the Evidence Act, the burden of proving non-payment rested on Oak Homes, which alleged breach of contract, and not on him.

A major plank of the appeal is the trial court’s reliance on the doctrine of novation.

Justice George had held that the conduct of both parties created a new contractual relationship which effectively extinguished the original agreement.

However, Ugbebor argued that the finding was contrary to established principles of Nigerian contract law.

Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Heritage Bank Ltd v. Ajugwo, he contended that novation cannot be presumed merely from the conduct of parties.

According to him, for novation to arise there must be a clear agreement by all parties to substitute the original contract with a new one, coupled with an intention to extinguish the previous contractual obligations.

He argued that no witness testified that such a new agreement existed and no documentary evidence established one.

Rather, he maintained that the conduct relied upon by the trial court was consistent only with issues of delayed performance and alleged breach, not the creation of an entirely new contract.

He therefore urged the Court of Appeal to hold that the original agreement remained valid and binding. …For more, Complete your reading.
You may like

Read The Full Story / Watch The Full Video

Continue Reading

Trending