The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) group has filed an appeal against Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court’s judgement awarding N100 million in damages in favour of the Department of State Services (DSS) officials.
NPO Reported that the court had last week slammed the N100 million damage on SERAP in the defamation suit filed against the organisation by the DSS officials.
The suit had stemmed from the alleged invasion of SERAP’s head office in Abuja by the DSS operatives- an incident which dated back to 2024.
In his ruling, the presiding judge, Justice Yusuf Halilu, ordered SERAP to pay N100 million in damages to the DSS officials for alleged defamation, issue public apologies, pay N1 million in litigation costs, and a 10 percent annual post-judgment interest on the damages until fully paid.
SERAP had in reaction to the judgment, which it considered to be a travesty and a miscarriage of justice, vowed to challenge the ruling before the Appeal Court.
Providing an update on the development, the organisation, in a statement issued on its X handle on Tuesday, announced that an appeal has been filed by its counsel, Tayo Oyetibo (SAN).
Coupled with the appeal filed on Friday, SERAP also disclosed filing an application seeking a stay of execution of the judgment pending the determination of the appeal.
The organisation said that it filed the appeal in a bid to challenge what it described as “a legally flawed decision resulting in a miscarriage of justice.”
In its Notice of Appeal, SERAP argued that the trial court had in the proceeding adopted a witness statement not sworn before a Commissioner for Oaths.
This, according to the organisation, rendered the ruling null and void.
“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.
“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 wrote.
The organisation asked the Court of Appeal to make: “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 further argued 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 also argued 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.
