The legal dispute between officials of the Department of State Services and the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project has moved to the appellate stage following SERAP’s decision to challenge a ₦100 million defamation judgment delivered against it by the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory in Abuja.

The judgment, delivered by Justice Yusuf Halilu on May 5, 2026, awarded damages in favour of DSS officials, Sarah John and Gabriel Ogundele, over publications linked to an alleged visit by DSS operatives to SERAP’s office.

In the appeal filed by senior advocate Tayo Oyetibo, SERAP argued that the judgment was flawed in both procedure and law. The organisation is asking the Court of Appeal to set aside the ruling entirely and also seeking a stay of execution pending the outcome of the appeal.

According to SERAP, the original suit was fundamentally defective because it was initially filed against “Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project,” which it claimed was not a legally recognised entity.

The organisation argued that the later amendment substituting its incorporated trustees could not cure what it described as a jurisdictional defect.

The appeal further challenged the trial court’s finding that the allegedly defamatory publications specifically referred to the DSS officials involved in the case. SERAP maintained that the publications neither mentioned the claimants by name nor contained sufficient details that could clearly identify them to ordinary members of the public.

The organisation also questioned the admissibility of certain witness statements relied upon during the trial, arguing that one of the depositions was not properly sworn before a Commissioner for Oaths as required under Nigerian law.

Beyond procedural issues, SERAP insisted that its statements were protected under constitutional rights to freedom of expression and public interest advocacy. The organisation argued that its publications were made in response to concerns surrounding the conduct of DSS operatives who allegedly visited its office without proper identification.

Legal observers say the appeal could become a significant test case on the balance between reputational rights and freedom of civic criticism in Nigeria. The matter has already generated debate within legal and civil society circles over concerns that large defamation awards could discourage advocacy and scrutiny of public institutions.

SERAP is also contesting the scale of the ₦100 million damages awarded, arguing that the DSS officials did not provide sufficient evidence showing actual reputational damage, financial loss, or professional harm resulting from the publications.

While the High Court judgment remains valid unless overturned or stayed by the appellate court, many analysts believe the final decision could have lasting implications for defamation law, civic activism, and public accountability in Nigeria.