The Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, has directed two officers of the Department of State Services (DSS) to file their respondents’ brief within 48 hours in an appeal by the director of the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP), Kolawole Oluwadare, challenging a N100 million defamation judgment against him and the organisation.
The directive was issued on Friday during proceedings in the appeal against a judgment of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), which awarded N100 million in damages against SERAP and Oluwadare over publications concerning an alleged invasion of the organisation’s Abuja office by security operatives in September 2024.
The appeal challenges the judgment delivered by Justice Yusuf Halilu on 5 May 2026, including the award of damages and an order directing SERAP and Oluwadare to publish an apology.
SERAP and Oluwadare are asking the appellate court to set aside the judgment on the grounds that the claimants failed to establish that the publications identified them or that the statements complained of were defamatory.
During Friday’s proceedings, counsel to Oluwadare informed the appellate court that the appeal was not ripe for hearing because the appellants’ brief had only been filed on Thursday.
The court, which had earlier reserved judgment in a related appeal, subsequently halted further proceedings after finding that the appeals were not ripe for hearing. It then directed the two DSS officers to file their respondents’ brief by Monday morning and serve Oluwadare’s lawyers. Oluwadare was directed to file his reply brief by Tuesday morning.
In its brief of argument, filed through its counsel, Tayo Oyetibo, SAN, SERAP raised 24 grounds of appeal, challenging the trial court’s findings on identification, falsity, liability, the admissibility and weight of evidence, and the application of constitutional protections for freedom of expression.
The organisation argued that neither publication identified the two DSS officers by name, rank, designation or photograph. It maintained that the physical descriptions in the reports were insufficient to establish that the claimants were the individuals referred to.
SERAP further contended that no independent witness testified that members of the public had read the publications and understood them to refer specifically to the two officers.
It also challenged the trial court’s reliance on its own observation of the claimants’ physical appearance, arguing that the relevant question was whether reasonable readers could identify them from the publications when they were published.
The organisation maintained that the findings on reputational injury and the damages awarded were unsupported by sufficient evidence.
The dispute arose from publications issued by SERAP on 9 September 2024, alleging that security operatives had entered its Abuja office after the organisation called on President Bola Tinubu to investigate alleged corruption at the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited and reverse increases in fuel prices.
The two officers subsequently instituted a defamation suit over the publications, which referred to security personnel and included descriptions of a woman and a man without naming them.
SERAP argued on appeal that the publications concerned the conduct of public officials and constituted commentary on matters of public interest, including human rights, accountability and the exercise of state security powers.
The organisation also questioned the competence of the original suit, arguing that it was initially instituted against an entity it considered to lack legal personality before the originating process was amended to substitute its incorporated trustees.
The Court of Appeal is expected to consider the appeals at its next sitting on Tuesday, 13 October 2026.