Nigerian defamation ruling against SERAP sparks rights group's concern

The Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa (IHRDA) has voiced serious concerns regarding a Nigerian court's defamation judgment that awarded N100 million ($62,000) in damages against the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP).

“

While IHRDA recognises the legitimate interest of individuals and institutions in protecting their reputation and acknowledges the important role that defamation laws may play in this regard, we are concerned about the broader human rights implications of judgments that may have the effect of discouraging or inhibiting the work of civil society organisations engaged in public-interest advocacy and accountability efforts.

The pan-African human rights organization warned that the ruling, delivered by the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, on May 5, 2026, could create a chilling effect on civic space and public-interest advocacy within Nigeria. The judgment arose from a civil defamation suit filed by two officials of the Department of State Services (DSS) after SERAP alleged in September 2024 that DSS officials had invaded its Abuja office in an act of intimidation.

While acknowledging the right of individuals and institutions to protect their reputation, IHRDA cautioned against legal actions that might discourage civil society organizations from conducting vital public-interest work. The organization noted that such lawsuits, especially against known accountability actors, can resemble Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs), designed to deter scrutiny through costly litigation.

“

This is more so in the context of a well-documented pattern of intimidation of NGOs and human rights defenders by the DSS in Nigeria. Viewed against this broader context, the proceedings bear several characteristics commonly associated with Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs), legal actions that seek to discourage scrutiny, criticism, or participation in matters of public interest through the threat of costly litigation.

IHRDA urged courts to recognize these potential SLAPPs and consider their impact on freedom of expression and human rights advocacy. The organization highlighted that this judgment comes amid growing global concerns about shrinking civic space, where civil society groups and activists increasingly face legal and administrative pressures.

“

Courts of law are duty-bound to identify SLAPPs and understand their underlying motive and censoring impact on public interest and human rights work, especially by known bona fide public interest and accountability actors.