Court Fixes March 21 To Hear N5bn DSS Defamation Suit Against SERAP

The Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court presided over by Justice Yusuf Halilu has fixed March 21, 2025 to begin 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 in October 2024 filed a defamation suit against SERAP after the organisation failed to apologise for accusing the DSS officials of unlawful invasion of its Abuja office a month earlier.

Among the reliefs sought by the DSS officers include ₦5billion in damages, apology published on SERAP’s website, social media, and in national newspapers and television stations.

In addition, the secret police officer were demanding ₦50 million for legal costs and 10 per cent annual interest on the N5 billion until payment was fully made.

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

RELATED

Catholic Bishops In Nigeria Congratulate Pope Leo XIV

34 minutes ago

Kidnapped UNIUYO Don Attributes Release From Captivity To Prayers

36 minutes ago

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

Counsel to 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, Halilu said all the processes for definite hearing were intact and that the court was ready to begin hearing into the matter.

This was as he wondered why the second defendant had already filed a defence on the matter.

He, however, urged that whatever objections the defendants have should be submitted to the court for determination for hearing to commence.

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

He them adjourned the hearing to March 21 after consultations by the counsels in the matter.