The High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, has ordered the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project to pay N100 million in damages to two operatives of the Department of State Services over defamatory publications.
Justice Yusuf Halilu delivered the judgment on Tuesday, holding the organisation liable for falsely accusing the officers, Sarah John and Gabriel Ogundele, of unlawfully invading its Abuja office in September 2024.
The court also directed SERAP to issue public apologies to the affected operatives in two national newspapers, two television stations, and on its official website.
In addition to the damages, the court awarded N1 million as litigation costs and imposed a 10 per cent annual interest on the judgment sum until full payment is made.
The suit, which sought N5.5 billion in damages, was instituted by the DSS operatives, who argued that SERAP’s claims had tarnished their professional reputation.
Justice Halilu ruled that the allegations contained in the organisation’s publications were unsubstantiated and inappropriate, particularly given its advocacy role in promoting accountability and transparency.
According to court findings, the claimants had visited SERAP’s office as part of a routine engagement aimed at establishing contact with the organisation’s leadership, not for any form of intimidation as alleged.
The judge held that the publication, which described unnamed DSS officials as having invaded and harassed staff, was misleading and damaging, even though the individuals were not expressly named.
The court further noted that sufficient evidence was presented to establish that the claimants were the officers referenced in the publication.
SERAP had argued that the suit lacked merit on the grounds that no specific individuals were identified in the statements. However, the court dismissed the defence, ruling that the surrounding circumstances clearly pointed to the claimants.
The DSS operatives had told the court that the publication exposed them to public ridicule and criticism, both locally and internationally, thereby affecting their standing within the agency and beyond.
With the ruling, the court reaffirmed the need for organisations to ensure accuracy in public statements, particularly when such claims have the potential to damage reputations.
