Reported by: Oahimire Omone Precious | Edited by: Oravbiere Osayomore Promise.
The Department of State Services has issued a formal clarification regarding the recent N100 million defamation judgment obtained by two of its operatives against the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP), insisting that the litigation was a personal legal action taken by the officers in their individual capacities and not a suit initiated by the Service as an organisation. In a press release signed by Deputy Director of Public Relations and Strategic Communications, Favour Dozie, on Wednesday, May 6, 2026, the DSS addressed widespread public commentary that it said had failed to put the matter in proper perspective.
The Service explained that the case arose from an allegation made by SERAP on September 9, 2024, claiming that DSS operatives had unlawfully invaded its Abuja office and harassed its staff. Following that allegation, the DSS said it immediately initiated an investigation into the claims against the affected operatives. After the investigation was concluded, the two officers, feeling personally defamed by SERAP’s public statement, sought and obtained approval from the Director General of the DSS to approach the court for redress in their personal capacities.
The Federal High Court in Abuja subsequently ruled in favour of the two operatives, awarding them N100 million in general damages. The court also ordered SERAP to issue a public apology on its website and in Punch and Vanguard newspapers, as well as to broadcast the apology on Arise and Channels Television stations. Additionally, the court imposed a 10 percent annual interest rate on the N100 million award from May 5, 2026, until the full sum is paid.
The DSS emphasised that the Service was not a party to the suit, and that the judgment was not a victory for the agency over SERAP but rather a personal vindication for the two officers. “The Service hereby reiterates that the suit was not between DSS as an organisation and SERAP. Rather, it was a case filed by two of our operatives, who in the course of their lawful duty, felt defamed by SERAP,” the statement read.
The agency went on to stress its dual obligation to protect its personnel who act lawfully and to sanction any officer found to have breached Nigerian laws or internal regulations. “We have demonstrated this time and again by prosecuting some of our staff for various offenses in competent courts,” the DSS noted. The Service expressed satisfaction that the court had provided a remedy for the “injustice” done to its officers, while reaffirming its commitment to professionalism and the rule of law.
The clarification comes amid intense public debate following the judgment, with some human rights groups expressing concern that the ruling could have a chilling effect on civil society criticism of security agencies. SERAP has since announced plans to appeal the decision, describing it as a “dangerous precedent” for civic space in Nigeria. The organisation has also called on its supporters to contribute to the payment of the damages while the appeal is pending, a move that has drawn both praise and criticism from legal analysts.
The DSS’s latest statement appears aimed at distancing the agency from the financial award, while still defending the right of its personnel to seek legal redress for defamation. By emphasising that the officers acted with the DG’s permission but not as representatives of the Service, the DSS may be trying to limit potential reputational damage and avoid the perception that it is using state power to silence its critics. Legal observers note that while the officers had the right to sue individually, the fact that they were on duty at the time of the alleged defamation and obtained official permission to litigate blurs the line between personal and institutional action.
The case has also raised questions about the extent to which security agency personnel can be held accountable for their official actions while simultaneously enjoying the right to defend their personal reputations. The DSS’s statement did not address the underlying allegation of office invasion and harassment, nor did it provide details of the internal investigation that cleared the operatives. Instead, the agency focused on the procedural fact that the lawsuit was a private legal remedy.
The N100 million award is now subject to the 10 percent annual interest clause, meaning the amount will grow if SERAP does not pay promptly. SERAP’s legal team has indicated that it will file a stay of execution pending appeal. The public apology order also remains a source of contention, as SERAP has not yet complied, stating that it would await the outcome of its appeal before taking any action.
The DSS’s press release concluded with a reassurance of its commitment to professionalism and the rule of law, noting that the Service would continue to protect the lawful conduct of its personnel while holding erring officers accountable. The agency did not announce any further actions or investigations related to the case.
As the legal battle between SERAP and the two DSS operatives continues, the wider implications for press freedom and civil society advocacy in Nigeria remain uncertain. The DSS’s clarification, while legally precise, may not silence critics who see the judgment as part of a broader pattern of judicial and security agency cooperation to punish accountability organisations. For now, the two operatives have their damages, SERAP has its appeal, and the DSS has its carefully worded distance.
📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters News | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews
Add comment
Comments