N101m Defamation Judgment: Court of Appeal Returns SERAP Case for Reassignment

The Court of Appeal has ordered the reassignment of a case involving the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) following a series of procedural setbacks in its appeal against a N101 million defamation judgment.

The judgment, reportedly delivered in May by a High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), was in favour of two operatives of the Department of State Services (DSS).

The latest development occurred on Tuesday when a special panel constituted by the President of the Court of Appeal directed that the case file be returned for reassignment after expressing dissatisfaction with the way a related application filed by SERAP’s deputy director was presented.

The incident marked the second procedural setback for the organisation within a few days. On Friday, the panel adjourned proceedings until Tuesday after SERAP failed to file the required application, according to the account of the proceedings.

Court Rejects Applications for Amicus Curiae Participation

Proceedings took a dramatic turn when SERAP’s lead counsel, Tayo Oyetibo, SAN, informed the court that an application had been filed seeking permission for certain individuals and organisations to participate as amici curiae, meaning friends of the court.

Following the court’s indication that it would hear the application, Professor Olanrewaju Fagbohun, SAN, a former Vice-Chancellor of the University of Lagos, rose to address the panel.

Fagbohun introduced himself as representing the University of Columbia through its Global Freedom of Expression initiative, as well as United Nations special rapporteurs concerned with freedom of assembly, association, opinion and expression.

He told the court that an application dated October 12 had been filed seeking permission for the proposed amici curiae to make independent submissions to assist the court in determining the appeal.

However, the presiding judge, Justice Danlami Senchi, questioned why the applicants sought to participate without an invitation from the court.

“Did the court invite you? Let’s be serious,” the judge asked, expressing concern that the approach could create an unfavourable impression of the judiciary.

Senchi maintained that the court had not requested external assistance and advised the applicants to withdraw their application to allow proceedings to continue.

Responding, Fagbohun said the proposed intervention was not intended to be adversarial but was aimed at assisting the court.

The judge, however, stressed that cases must be decided on their merits and that the applicants were neither parties to the original proceedings nor parties to the appeal.

Following the exchange, Fagbohun withdrew the application and apologised to the court. The judge commended him for the decision.

Mojirayo Ogunlana, counsel representing the Southern African Litigation Centre, subsequently withdrew a separate application seeking similar permission to participate as an amicus curiae.

Panel Expresses Dissatisfaction With SERAP Application

After reserving judgment on the appeal filed by SERAP’s incorporated trustees, the panel turned to a related appeal involving the organisation’s deputy director.

The application had been at the centre of the previous Friday’s adjournment.

The panel expressed dissatisfaction with the manner in which counsel Kolawole Ogundare presented the application and framed the reliefs being sought.

Justice Senchi advised the lawyer to seek guidance from more experienced colleagues, criticising the drafting of the prayers and indicating that the court could not grant them in their existing form.

The judge suggested that the application would need to be withdrawn and properly refiled.

He subsequently directed that the case file be returned for reassignment, bringing the proceedings before the special panel to an end.

The latest development concerns the handling of the appeal and related applications. It does not, in itself, establish that the Court of Appeal has affirmed the N101 million defamation judgment against SERAP.