The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has appealed 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).

SERAP described the judgment as “a miscarriage of justice” and a legally flawed decision.

The appeal, filed on Friday, 8 May 2026, by senior lawyer Tayo Oyetibo on behalf of SERAP, is accompanied by an application seeking a stay of execution pending the determination of the appeal.

According to SERAP, the Notice of Appeal would be amended upon receipt of the Certified True Copy of the judgment to include additional aspects of the ruling which it believes further expose the flaws in the court’s decision.

Justice Yusuf Halilu had ordered SERAP to pay ₦100 million in damages to two DSS officials over alleged defamation. The court also directed the organisation to publish public apologies, pay ₦1 million as litigation costs, and a 10 per cent annual post judgment interest on the damages until full payment is made.

In its appeal, SERAP argued that the judgment was based on “fundamental legal and evidential errors” affecting jurisdiction and fairness in adjudication.

The organisation maintained that the trial court relied on defective evidence, including a witness statement allegedly not sworn before a Commissioner for Oaths, which it said ought to have been rejected.

SERAP is asking the Court of Appeal to set aside the entire judgment delivered in Suit No. CV/4547/2024 and dismiss the case for lacking merit.

The organisation further argued that the case raises critical legal questions regarding jurisdiction, defamation law, constitutional rights, and international fair trial standards.

According to SERAP, the lower court failed to apply the established objective test in defamation cases and instead relied on the subjective interpretation of DSS personnel.

The appeal also challenged the amendment of the originating court processes, arguing that the initial suit was filed against a non juristic entity and that such a defect could not legally be cured through amendment.

SERAP further contended that the alleged defamatory publications neither mentioned the claimants by name nor contained any unique identifiers linking them personally to the statements in question.

The organisation also insisted that it acted within the bounds of justification, qualified privilege, and fair comment in publishing information relating to what it described as an intrusive and intimidating visit by DSS operatives to its office.

According to SERAP, evidence before the court showed that some DSS officials allegedly concealed their identities during the visit, including the use of a false name.

The organisation argued that the claimants failed to prove actual reputational damage, financial loss, or any professional setback resulting from the publications.

SERAP further stated that no member of the public testified that the publications were understood to refer specifically to the DSS officials involved in the suit.

In its application for stay of execution, SERAP warned that enforcing the judgment could severely disrupt its operations and undermine its human rights advocacy activities.

The organisation stated that immediate enforcement of the judgment could cripple its ability to fund ongoing investigations, legal interventions, and public interest advocacy programmes across Nigeria.

SERAP also argued that executing the judgment before the appeal is determined would effectively deny it the constitutional right to pursue its appeal adequately.

The suit was instituted by DSS officials Sarah John and Gabriel Ogundele, who accused SERAP of defamation in connection with publications concerning the activities of DSS operatives.