SERAP described the judgement guven in favour of two SSS officials as “a travesty and a miscarriage of justice.”
The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has appealed against the 5 May judgement of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court in Abuja awarding N100 million in damages in favour of officials of the State Security Service (SSS).
The civil society orgainsation described the judgement as “a travesty and a miscarriage of justice.”
A statement by SERAP’s Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare, on Thursday, said the appeal, filed on Friday, 8 May, through its lawyer, Tayo Oyetibo, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), urged the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, to set aside the judgement and dismiss the substantive suit in its entirety.
Judge Yusuf Halilu of the FCT High Court in Abuja, in his judgement delivered on 5 May, awarded N100 million damages against SERAP as compensation for defamation of two operatives of the secret police organisation.
The SSS operatives had sued SERAP in October 2024, accusing the non-governmental organisation of falsely claiming that its operatives, in September 2024, invaded its Abuja office.
The two operatives of the SSS are Sarah John and Gabriel Ogundele.
The court, in its judgement, directed the organisation to issue public apologies, pay N1 million in litigation costs, and a 10 per cent annual post-judgment interest on the N100 million damages until fully paid.
But SERAP, displeased with the verdict, argued in its notice of appeal that “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 said, “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 therefore asking the Court of Appeal for: “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.”
It said “the appeal is not merely about the outcome of the case, but about whether a court can validly sustain proceedings founded on a defective originating process, or impose liability where the legal thresholds for defamation have not been met.”
According to SERAP, “the judgment is legally defective, procedurally flawed, and unsupported by evidence, raising substantial questions of jurisdiction, defamation law, and constitutional and international fair trial standards.”
SERAP is arguing that, “the court failed to apply the well-established objective test in defamation law, relying instead on subjective perceptions within the DSS rather than the understanding of ordinary members of the public.”
SERAP’s Notice of Appeal, read in part: “the lower court erred in law when it allowed the amendment of the Writ of Summons to substitute the name of a non-juristic person with a juristic person.”
“Particulars Of Error: the Respondents instituted this action at the trial Court by initially filing a Writ of Summons against the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, a non-juristic person. The Respondents amended their Writ of Summons to substitute the said non-juristic entity with the Incorporated Trustees of the Socio-Economic Rights And Accountability Project.”
This judgment is totally unacceptable to us,
Read SERAP’s statement in full below.
The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has filed an appeal against the judgment delivered on 5 May 2026 by the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, which awarded ₦100 million in damages in favour of officials of the Department of State Services (DSS), a judgment SERAP considers to be “a travesty and a miscarriage of justice.”
The appeal, filed last Friday, 8 May 2026, by Tayo Oyetibo, SAN, on behalf of SERAP, is accompanied by an application seeking a stay of execution of the judgment pending the determination of the appeal, challenging what SERAP describes as “a legally flawed decision resulting in a miscarriage of justice.”
SERAP said, “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. Pending this, the appeal and the accompanying application for stay of execution already filed and served provide adequate legal protection for our organisation.”
Justice Yusuf Halilu had in his judgment last week ordered SERAP to pay ₦100 million in damages to the DSS officials for alleged defamation, issue public apologies, pay ₦1 million in litigation costs, and a 10 percent annual post-judgment interest on the damages until fully paid.
In its Notice of Appeal, SERAP is arguing that “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 said, “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 therefore asking the Court of Appeal for: “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.”
SERAP is arguing that, “the appeal is not merely about the outcome of the case, but about whether a court can validly sustain proceedings founded on a defective originating process, or impose liability where the legal thresholds for defamation have not been met.”
According to SERAP, “the judgment is legally defective, procedurally flawed, and unsupported by evidence, raising substantial questions of jurisdiction, defamation law, and constitutional and international fair trial standards.”
SERAP is arguing that, “the court failed to apply the well-established objective test in defamation law, relying instead on subjective perceptions within the DSS rather than the understanding of ordinary members of the public.”
SERAP’s Notice of Appeal, read in part: “the lower court erred in law when it allowed the amendment of the Writ of Summons to substitute the name of a non-juristic person with a juristic person.”
“Particulars Of Error: the Respondents instituted this action at the trial Court by initially filing a Writ of Summons against the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, a non-juristic person. The Respondents amended their Writ of Summons to substitute the said non-juristic entity with the Incorporated Trustees of the Socio-Economic Rights And Accountability Project.”
“An action commenced against a non-juristic person is fundamentally defective and does not constitute a misnomer which is capable of amendment. An amendment cannot cure a void originating process nor effect the substitution of a distinct juristic entity for a party that does not exist in law.”
