Judge sets March 21 for ₦5b DSS defamation suit against SERAP

A judge of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Yusuf Halilu, on Wednesday fixed March 21, 2025, to begin a definite hearing on a case of defamation filed by two officers of the Department of State Services (DSS) against the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP).

The DSS officers had, last October, filed a defamation suit against SERAP after the organisation failed to apologise for accusing the DSS officials of unlawfully invading its Abuja office a month earlier.

Among the relief sought by the DSS officers are ₦5 billion in damages and an apology published on SERAP’s website, social media and in national newspapers and TV stations. In addition, ₦50 million is sought for legal costs, along with 10 percent annual interest on the ₦5 billion until payment is made in full.

When the matter came up for a definitive hearing on Wednesday, March 12, 2025, SERAP’s legal team raised several interlocutory applications and objections.

The objections centered on the court’s jurisdiction, the claim that they were not properly served, and the argument that the DSS officials lacked legal standing to sue since they were affiliated with the agency.

Counsel to the second defendant, Hannah Anyowale, prayed the court to discountenance the counter-affidavit filed by the plaintiff and grant their application to strike out the matter.

Also, Divine Oguru, who appeared for the first defendant, SERAP, adopted the submissions of the second defendant.

However, the presiding judge, Yusuf Halilu, said all the processes for a definite hearing were intact and that the court was ready to begin hearing the matter.

He also wondered why the second defendant had already filed a defense on the matter.

He, however, urged that whatever objections the defendants had should be submitted to the court so they could be determined, allowing the hearing to commence.

This, the judge said, was to avoid going back and forth on the matter.

He adjourned the hearing to next week after consultations by the counsels in the matter.

Meanwhile, counsel to the plaintiff, A. T. Kehinde, SAN, who appeared with two others, described the submission of the defendant as lacking merit and aimed at annoying, frustrating, and wasting the time of the court.

He said they had responded to all the objections and were ready for the hearing to begin.