NEYGA Condemns SERAP’s Reaction to Court Judgment on Defamed DSS Operatives

The (NEYGA) Northern Ethnic Youth Group Assembly has criticised the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) over its reaction to a recent court judgment awarding N100 million in damages to two operatives of the Department of State Services (DSS) who were allegedly defamed.

The youth group described SERAP’s characterization of the judgment as “a travesty” as unfair, irresponsible, and disrespectful to the judiciary. NEYGA maintained that the court acted within the law and urged civil society organisations to exercise caution when commenting on judicial pronouncements.

NEYGA Defends Court Decision

In a statement issued on Thursday, NEYGA said the judgment was a reflection of the independence of the judiciary and should not be ridiculed simply because some groups disagreed with the outcome.
According to the group, the court carefully considered the evidence presented before arriving at its decision to award damages to the DSS operatives over claims of defamation. NEYGA argued that every Nigerian citizen, including security personnel, has the constitutional right to seek legal redress when reputational damage occurs.

The group further stated that attacks on judicial decisions without due regard for legal processes could undermine public confidence in the justice system. It warned against attempts to politicize court rulings or portray them as acts of intimidation against activists and civil society organisations.

NEYGA also stressed that while advocacy groups play an important role in promoting accountability and transparency, such interventions must remain respectful and constructive. The assembly urged stakeholders to allow the appellate courts to determine any grievances arising from the judgment instead of making inflammatory public statements.

SERAP’s Position Sparks Debate

SERAP had reportedly described the court ruling as a “travesty,” arguing that the judgment could have wider implications for freedom of expression and civic advocacy in Nigeria.
The organisation expressed concern that heavy financial penalties in defamation cases involving public institutions or security agencies may discourage activists and whistleblowers from speaking out on issues of public interest.

However, NEYGA dismissed the argument, insisting that freedom of expression does not grant immunity from accountability or protection against defamatory conduct. The group argued that responsible public engagement must be guided by facts, evidence, and respect for individual rights.

Observers say the disagreement highlights the continuing tension between civil society advocacy and the protection of institutional reputation, particularly in cases involving security agencies. Legal analysts note that such disputes are often settled through appeals and judicial review rather than public confrontation.

Calls for Institutional Respect and Responsible Advocacy

NEYGA called on Nigerians to respect court judgments and avoid statements capable of inciting distrust in public institutions. The group noted that criticism of the judiciary should be constructive and pursued within the boundaries of the law.

The assembly also encouraged civil society organisations to focus on strengthening democratic institutions through dialogue and lawful engagement rather than public condemnation of judicial outcomes.

Meanwhile, legal experts have emphasized the importance of balancing freedom of speech with the right to dignity and reputation. They argued that defamation laws remain a legitimate part of democratic legal systems worldwide and should not automatically be viewed as attacks on civic freedoms.

As reactions continue to trail the judgment, analysts believe the case may further shape discussions around accountability, human rights advocacy, and the limits of public commentary in Nigeria’s democratic space.