Judiciary
Court Adjourns for Judgment in DSS Officers’ N5.5bn Defamation Case Against SERAP
A High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) has reserved judgment in a N5.
The court, presided over by Justice Halilu Yusuf, fixed the matter for judgment on a date to be communicated to the parties after counsel adopted their final written addresses and presented concluding submissions in the case filed by the two DSS officers, Sarah John and Gabriel Ogundele.
Also listed as a defendant in the suit, marked CV/4547/2024, is Kolawole Oluwadare, SERAP’s Deputy Director.
The claimants accused SERAP of falsely alleging that John and Ogundele unlawfully invaded its Abuja office on September 9, 2024.
Adopting the claimants’ final written address, their counsel, Oluwagbemileke Kehinde, urged the court to grant all the reliefs sought. He challenged the competence of the 12-page reply address filed on behalf of the second defendant, arguing that it contravened Order 39 Rule 2 of the court’s rules, which stipulates that a reply address should not exceed 10 pages.
Kehinde maintained that the claimants had sufficiently proved their case, asserting that they were the individuals referred to in the alleged defamatory publication. He rejected the defendants’ argument that success in a defamation claim requires that the entire society must know the claimants, stressing that it was enough that their colleagues understood the publication to refer to them.
According to him, all the elements of defamation had been established, noting that there was no dispute over the existence of the publication.
Earlier, counsel to SERAP, Victoria Bassey, adopted her client’s final written address and reply on points of law after the court granted her request to regularise the filings made out of time. She urged the court to dismiss the suit, arguing that since the claimants were not expressly named in the publication, they must prove they were the persons referred to before succeeding in a defamation action.
Bassey further contended that the claimants failed to establish that they were indeed the subjects of the publication.
Similarly, counsel to Oluwadare, Oluwatosin Adesioye, aligned with Bassey’s arguments and asked the court to dismiss the suit. He questioned the court’s jurisdiction, arguing that the claimants did not show that the DSS is recognised by law, noting that the National Security Agencies Act refers to the State Security Service rather than the DSS.
Adesioye also faulted the claimants’ final written address, alleging that it exceeded the permitted 30 pages by five pages.
While testifying for the defence on November 24, 2025, Oluwadare admitted making the publication in question based on information he received from Vivian Amadi, a front desk officer at SERAP’s Abuja office. He stated that he was not physically present at the office but was informed about the presence of DSS officials on the premises.
During proceedings, he was handed two documents, including the publication in dispute, and read out the first paragraph in court. In the statement posted on SERAP’s website, he alleged that DSS operatives had unlawfully invaded the organisation’s Abuja office, intimidated and harassed staff, and called on President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to intervene.
Oluwadare admitted using words such as “unlawful,” “intimidating,” and “harassing” in the publication but disagreed that they amounted to serious allegations against the claimants. He acknowledged that he did not consult the DSS before issuing the statement and confirmed that the officers did not brandish weapons, seize or damage property, assault staff, or force entry into the office.
He added that he was informed the first claimant was making calls and asking other DSS officials not to enter the premises and claimed that CCTV footage of the incident exists.
In their statement of claim, the DSS officers argued that the publication damaged both their personal reputations and that of the agency. They explained that as part of routine engagement with non-governmental organisations operating in the FCT, they were directed to visit SERAP’s office to invite its new leadership for a familiarisation meeting.
According to them, they visited SERAP’s office at 18 Bamako Street, Wuse Zone 1, Abuja, on September 9 and met a staff member identified as Ruth, who informed them that the organisation’s management was out of the country and advised that a formal letter be sent. They stated that their interaction was recorded and that they left peacefully after being given a contact number.
They expressed surprise that shortly after their departure, SERAP posted on its X (formerly Twitter) handle, @SERAPNigeria, alleging that DSS officers were unlawfully occupying its office.
They further claimed that the defendants published a statement describing the officers as “a tall, large, dark-skinned woman” and “a slim, dark-skinned man” who allegedly invaded and interrogated staff.
The claimants told the court that the publication led to criticism from international organisations such as Amnesty International and prominent Nigerians, including Femi Falana (SAN), thereby portraying the Federal Government as using the DSS to harass civil society groups.
They argued that the statements harmed their professional standing within the DSS, creating the impression that they carried out an unsanctioned operation and acted unprofessionally.
Among the reliefs sought, the claimants are asking the court to order the defendants to publish an apology on SERAP’s website and X handle, as well as in two national newspapers — Punch and Vanguard — and on two national television stations — Arise Television and Channels Television.
They are also seeking N5 billion in damages for the alleged libellous publication, 10 percent annual interest on the judgment sum until full payment, and N50 million as costs of the action.
Continue Reading