A High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), has reserved judgment in a N5.5billion defamation suit filed by two operatives of the Department of State Services (DSS) the Socio-economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP).
The court presided over by Justice Halilu Yusuf reserved judgement on Thursday, after lawyers to parties adopted their final written addresses, and made their final submissions in the suit filed by the two officers, Sarah John and Gabriel Ogundele, said the date will be communicated to the parties.
Listed with SERAP as defendants in the suit, marked: CV/4547/2024, is Kolawole Oluwadare, its Deputy Director.
The claimants accused SERAP of making false claims that John and Ogundele invaded their Abuja office on September 9, 2024.
While adopting the final written address of the claimant on Thursday, counsel to the claimants, Oluwagbemileke Kehinde, urged the court to grant all the reliefs sought by his clients and faulted the competence of the 12-page reply address filed for the second defendant.
Kehinde argued that it violated Order 39 Rule 2 of the court’s Rules, which provides that reply address should not exceed 10 pages and therefore urged the court to discountenance the address.
He also argued that the claimants have substantially proved their case having established that the officers were the people referred to in the alleged defamatory publication made by the defendants
Kehinde further argued against the position of the defendants that every person in the society must know the claimants before they can succeed in a defamation claim and told the court that it sufficient that the claimants’ colleague was aware of the alleged defamatory publication and understood that it referred to the claimants.
According to Kehinde; “All the ingredients of defamation have been priced. It referred to the claimants and there is no denial that there was a publication”.
Earlier in his own argument before the court, counsel to SERAP, Victoria Bassey adopted her client’s final address and address on reply on point of law after the court granted her request to deem the addresses deemed properly filed, having been filed out of time.
Bassey urged the court to dismiss the suit, saying that since the claimants were not specifically named in the publication complained about, they must prove that they were the people referred to in the publication before they could succeed in a defamation suit.
She further argued that the claimants failed to establish that the were the subjects of the publication complained about.
Similarly, counsel to Oluwadare (2nd defendant), Oluwatosin Adesioye made similar arguments as Bassey and urged the court to dismiss the suit.
Adesioye said his clients queried the court’s jurisdiction in the final written address on the grounds that not only did the claimants fail to establish that they were the people referred to in the publication, they also did not show that the DSS is known to law.
He also argued that what is known in the National Security Agencies Act, is the State Security Service and not DSS.
He particularly faulted the competence of the claimants’ final written address, which he claimed exceeded the stipulated 30 pages by five pages.
While testifying for the defence on November 24, 2025, Oluwadare admitted that he made the publication complained about based on the information he got from one Vivian Amadi, a front desk officer and receptionist in SERAP’s Abuja office.
The witness admitted that he was not present in the office, but was called by the Vivian Amadi to inform him of the presence of the DSS officials in the SERAP’s premises.
Oluwadare was handed two documents, including the publication complained about by the claimants, and was asked to read out the first paragraph to the hearing of everyone in court, which he did.
In the publication posted on SERAP’s website, the witness raised an alarm, claiming that the DSS had invaded SERAP’s Abuja office unlawfully, intimidating and harassing its staff, and called on President Bola Tinubu to call the DSS officials to order.
After reading, the witness admitted using the words – unlawful, intimidating, harassing – in the publications, but disagreed that the words used in the publications are serious allegations against the two claimants.
The witness also admitted not consulting with the DSS before making the publications, adding that while they were in SERAP’s office, the two DSS officials did not brandish any weapon and also said that throughout their presence, the two DSS officials did not seize or damage any property nor was any staff of SERAP physically assaulted by the security agents.
Oluwadare also admitted that the DSS officials did not break any door to gain entry into their office, but said that he was told that the first claimant (Sarah John) was making calls and asking other officials of the DSS not to come inside SERAP’s office.
The witness claimed to have the CCTV footage of the DSS officials’ entrance into SERAP’s office.
The claimants in the suit, stated among others, that the alleged false claim by SERAP has negatively impacted on the reputation of the Agency and that of the two officials involved.
This was as they told the court in their statement of claim, that, in line with its practice of engaging with officials of non governmental organisations operating in the FCT to establish a relationship with their new leadership, it directed the two officials – John and Ogunleye – to visit SERAP’s office and invite its new leadership for a familiarisation meeting.
The claimants further said that in carrying out the directive, John and Ogunleye paid a friendly visit to SERAP’s office at 18 Bamako Street, Wuse Zone 1, Abuja on September 9 and met with one Ruth, who upon being informed about the purpose of the visit, claimed that none of SERAP’s management staff was in the country and advised that a formal letter of invitation be written by the DSS.
John and Ogundele, who claimed that their interactions with Ruth were recorded, said before they immediately exited SERAP’s office, Ruth promised to inform her organisation’s management about the visit and volunteered a phone number – 08160537202.
The claimants said it was surprising that shortly after their visit, SERAP posted on its X (Twitter) handle: @SERAPNigeria, that officers of the DSS are presently unlawfully occupying its office.
The claimant further said; “on the same day, the defendants also published a statement on SERAP’s website which was widely reported by several media outfits, alleging that some officers from the DSS, described as “a tall, large, dark-skinned woman” and “a slim, dark-skinned man,” invaded their Abuja office and interrogated the staff of the first defendant (SERAP).
John and Ogundele said; “Due to the false statements published by the defendants, the DSS has been ridiculed and criticised by international agencies such as the Amnesty International and prominent members of the Nigerian society, such as Femi Falana, SAN.
“Due to the false statements published by the defendants, members of the public and the international community formed the opinion that the Federal Government is using the DSS to harass the defendants”.
They added that the defendants’ statements caused harm to their reputation as the staff and management of the DSS have formed the opinion that the claimants did not follow orders and carried out an unsanctioned operation and are therefore, incompetent and unprofessional.
The claimants therefore prayed the court for an order directing the defendants to tender an apology to the claimants via the first defendant’s (SERAP’s) website, X (twitter) handle, publish the apology in two national daily newspapers (Punch and Vanguard) and two national news television stations (Arise Television and Channels Television) for falsely accusing the claimants of unlawfully invading the first defendant’s office and interrogating the first defendant’s staff.
The claimants also prayed the court for an order directing the defendants to pay the claimants the sum of N5billion as damages for the libellous statements published about the claimants.
The claimants are also demanding interest on the sum of N5b at the rate of 10 percent per annum from the date of judgment until the judgment sum is realised or liquidated and an order directing the defendants to pay the claimants the sum of N50million as costs of this action.
