The Committee for the Defence of Human Rights, CDHR, has criticised the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, SERAP, for condemning a court judgment that awarded N100 million in damages to two operatives of the Department of State Services, DSS, over defamatory claims.
Justice Halilu Yusuf of the FCT High Court, in a judgment delivered on Tuesday, ordered SERAP to pay N100 million in general damages to the two DSS operatives, Sarah John and Gabriel Ogundele. The court also awarded N1 million as litigation costs and directed SERAP to publish apologies in two national newspapers, two television stations, as well as on its website and X handle.
SERAP and some individuals linked to the organisation have since criticised the ruling, describing it as a “travesty” and an attempt to stifle free speech.
A senior lawyer and trustee of SERAP, Ebun-Olu Adegborowa, alleged that the judgment did not reflect the legal arguments presented in court, while the group’s Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare, described the decision as strange.
Speaking on News Central TV on Thursday, Oluwadare argued that even in undefended defamation suits, claimants must prove that the statement was made, referred to them, was false, was published to a third party, and caused reputational damage.
Reacting to SERAP’s position, CDHR said the organisation’s public attacks on the judgment were inconsistent with the principles of accountability and rule of law it claims to uphold.
In a statement signed by its President, Comrade Debo Adeniran, and National Publicity Secretary, Comrade Deacon Jeremiah Onyibe, CDHR said every individual and institution, including civil society organisations, must respect decisions of competent courts regardless of personal opinion or institutional interest.
The group said that while citizens and advocacy organisations have a constitutional right to freedom of expression and public criticism, such rights must be exercised responsibly and within the bounds of the law.
According to CDHR, the court, after reviewing the evidence before it, found that the publication against the DSS operatives was defamatory and damaging to their professional reputation.
“The rule of law remains the foundation of every democratic society. Human rights advocacy must coexist with accountability, fairness, and respect for due process,” the statement said.
CDHR added that no organisation, regardless of its standing in civil society, is above the law, just as no security agency should be shielded from lawful scrutiny.
The rights group urged SERAP to respect the judgment, comply with all lawful directives contained in it pending any appeal, and refrain from making further public statements capable of escalating tensions or undermining judicial authority.
It also advised SERAP to allow the legal process run its course through the appellate system if it remains dissatisfied with the judgment, and to avoid what it described as inflammatory narratives that could deepen institutional distrust or portray the judiciary as partisan without credible basis.
Similarly, the Centre Against Injustice and Domestic Violence also condemned SERAP’s criticism of the judgment.
In a statement signed by its Executive Director, Comrade Gbenga Soloki, the Centre said SERAP first claimed that DSS officers invaded its Abuja office on September 9, 2024, and noted that the post remained pinned on the organisation’s X handle nearly two years later.
Soloki said human rights groups should lead by example and not be seen violating the rights of others in the name of free speech.
“Human rights is universal. It is for everybody. We should not trample on the rights of others simply because they chose to be security agents,” he said.
The Centre also dismissed the amount awarded by the court as excessive, noting that N100 million amounts to less than $72,000, and compared the decision to sanctions imposed on major global firms for misconduct.
It further criticised senior lawyers associated with SERAP, particularly Adegborowa, for publicly attacking the judgment instead of encouraging an appeal.
The group said SERAP had ample time during the nearly two years the case lasted to assemble its legal team and defend itself in court, but chose instead to turn to the media after losing the case.
It described as ironic that SERAP, which has frequently relied on the courts to hold public institutions accountable, is now attacking the judiciary because the ruling did not go in its favour.
Crediblenewsng.com
