The Court of Appeal in Abuja has vacated its earlier order reserving judgment in the ₦100 million defamation case involving the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) and two Department of State Services (DSS) officers, directing that the case files be returned to the President of the court to determine a fresh hearing date.
The presiding judge, Justice Danlami Senchi, gave the directive on Tuesday during proceedings in two related appeals arising from the dispute.
The appeals are marked CA/ABJ/CV/1114/2026 and CA/ABJ/CV/1105/2026.
“All the two files are hereby returned to the President for decision on a date for hearing of both appeals that is going to be communicated to the parties,” Senchi said.
The judge also vacated the earlier order reserving the appeal marked CA/ABJ/CV/1114/2026 for judgment.
The development followed proceedings in a related appeal filed by Kolawole Oluwadare against Sarah John and two others.
During the hearing, counsel for the appellant, Oluwatosin Adesioye, sought permission to amend the reliefs in an application relating to additional records of appeal and an extension of time to challenge the ruling and judgment of the lower court.
However, Senchi expressed reservations about the application and advised the counsel to refine his prayers.
Adesioye subsequently withdrew the application, which the court struck out without objection from the respondents’ counsel.
SERAP Challenges ₦100m Damages Award
SERAP’s substantive appeal challenges a May 5, 2026, judgment of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, presided over by Justice Yusuf Halilu, which awarded ₦100 million in damages against the organisation in favour of two DSS officers.
The suit arose from publications concerning an alleged visit by DSS operatives to SERAP’s Abuja office in September 2024.
Arguing the appeal, SERAP’s counsel, Tayo Oyetibo, SAN, challenged the jurisdiction of the trial court and questioned the identification of one of the respondents.
Oyetibo argued that the judgment was delivered in favour of Sarah John for a person identified as Sarah David, insisting that the physical description contained in the publications was insufficient to establish the individual’s identity without a photograph.
He adopted SERAP’s brief of argument and urged the appellate court to set aside the judgment.
Counsel to the first and second respondents, O. S. Kehinde, however, urged the court to dismiss the appeal.
Kehinde argued that SERAP had failed to establish that Sarah John and Sarah David were different persons, adding that the issue had not been raised before the trial court.
On identification, he submitted that a person did not necessarily have to be expressly named in a publication for it to be actionable, provided people familiar with the individual could identify them from the description.
He also said a prosecution witness had testified during the trial that the respondents were identified through the descriptions contained in the publications.
Counsel for the third respondent did not present arguments in the appeal.
Columbia University, Others Withdraw Applications
The court also considered applications by Columbia University, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association, and the Southern Africa Litigation Centre seeking permission to participate in SERAP’s appeal as amici curiae—independent parties allowed to assist a court with submissions on relevant legal issues.
Counsel for the applicants argued that the appeal raised constitutional and fundamental human rights questions of public interest with international implications.
Senchi, however, observed that the applicants were not parties to the case at the trial court and noted that permission to participate was at the court’s discretion.
Following the judge’s observations, the applicants withdrew their respective applications, which were subsequently struck out without objection from the parties.
The Court of Appeal’s latest directive means that the President of the court will determine a fresh hearing date for the two appeals, which will be communicated to the parties.
The dispute remains unresolved, with SERAP’s challenge to the ₦100 million damages award still awaiting further proceedings.
