A constitutional lawyer, Mr Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN, has picked holes in the Tuesday, May 5, 2026 judgement delivered by a High Court of the FCT in the N5.5 billion defamation suit against the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP).
Adegboruwa specifically described the judgment as “strange” and lacking precedent, warning that it could have far-reaching implications for civil society organisations, potentially exposing them to undue legal risks.
The senior lawyer further described the judgement as inconsistent with established legal principles and a threat to democratic accountability.
Adegboruwa, who stated these while reacting to the court’s verdict, argued that the court failed to properly address key legal issues raised during proceedings, particularly the question surrounding the statutory identity of the Department of State Services (DSS), statutorily known to law as State Security Service (SSS).
The senior lawyer also contended that the court did not sufficiently examine whether public officers could institute a defamation suit in their personal capacity over actions carried out in the course of their official duties.
Adegboruwa noted that the plaintiffs had informed the court that they were still under internal investigation by their employer regarding their conduct during the incident at SERAP’s office, stressing that despite this obvious fact, the court still proceeded to find SERAP liable for libel without clear proof establishing the identities of those who were allegedly defamed.
Adegboruwa particularly faulted the N100 million damages awarded to the plaintiffs, describing the amount as excessive and unsupported by evidence.
He emphasised that the claimants, identified as public officers, did not provide details of their ranks or earnings to justify such compensation, just as he raised concerns over what he described as “a contradiction” in the case.
Adegboruwa also noted that the plaintiffs, who were reportedly on official assignment funded by public resources, sought personal damages for actions linked to their official duties.
He also questioned the award of a 10 per cent interest on the damages, arguing that no contractual basis or sufficient legal justification for such interest was established during the trial.
Adegboruwa, who was part of SERAP’s legal team, said that steps were already underway to challenge the ruling of the FCT High Court at the appellate court.
