The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has asked a Federal Capital Territory High Court in Maitama to dismiss the N5.5 billion defamation suit filed against it by officials of the Department of State Services (DSS).
The suit, marked CV/4547/2024, was filed on October 17 by two DSS officials, Sarah John and Gabriel Ogundele, who alleged that SERAP defamed them by accusing DSS operatives of unlawfully invading its Abuja office in September 2024.
In September, SERAP claimed DSS agents were “unlawfully occupying” its office and demanded to see its directors. The alleged incident occurred less than 24 hours after the organisation urged President Bola Tinubu to direct the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPC) to reverse the hike in petrol pump prices.
SERAP also asked the President to instruct the DSS to end what it described as harassment and intimidation of Nigerians.
While the DSS confirmed visiting the office, it denied any wrongdoing, describing the visit as a routine investigation. The agency labelled SERAP’s claims as “malicious” and reiterated its commitment to professionalism.
John and Ogundele argued that SERAP’s publication damaged their reputation as law-abiding security officers. They are seeking N5.5 billion in damages and a public apology to be published on SERAP’s website, national newspapers and aired on television stations.
At Thursday’s proceedings, parties adopted their final written addresses before Justice Yusuf Halilu, who reserved judgment.
Victoria Bassey, counsel to SERAP, urged the court to dismiss the suit, arguing that the claimants failed to prove they were personally defamed.
She maintained that the publication referred broadly to the DSS and did not mention the names, ranks or units of the claimants.
“Words directed at such a broad institutional body cannot automatically become personal defamation,” she argued.
Counsel to SERAP’s deputy director, Kolawole Oluwadare, also asked the court to dismiss the case, insisting that the claimants failed to establish special circumstances linking them to the publication at the point it was read.
However, counsel to the claimants, Akinlolo Kehinde, argued that explicit naming is not always required in defamation cases. He relied on the legal principle of innuendo, contending that colleagues with background knowledge could identify the officers from the publication.
He urged the court to grant all reliefs sought.
Justice Halilu has reserved judgment in the DSS N5.5bn defamation suit.
