A high court of the Federal Capital Territory on Friday began definite hearing in the case of defamation instituted by two operatives of the Department of State Services (DSS) against the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP).

The officers instituted the case after SERAP, last September, failed to apologize to the secret police after accusing its operatives of invading its Abuja office. The DSS officers, Sarah John and Gabriel Ogundele, consequently filed the defamation lawsuit in October 2024, seeking ₦5 billion in damages from SERAP.

In addition to the remedy sought by the officers for what they called reputational harm, was demand for an apology published on SERAP’s website, national dailies and television stations, N50 million for legal costs and 10 percent annual interest on the N5 billion until payment is completed.
At the resumed hearing, the presiding judge, advised the defence (SERAP) to go through all the six documents tendered by the plaintiffs. He stressed that all objections would be part of the final written address.

The hearing kicked off with the cross examination of the first claimant, Sarah, referred to as ( Plaintiff Witness 1) PW1, by the counsels to the first and second defendants.
SERAP was represented in court by Divine Oguru, while its deputy director was represented by Oluwatosin Adesoye, who apologized for the absence of his client.
Akinolu Timothy Kehinde, SAN, who represented the plaintiffs, said he was fully prepared for the hearing.

Both defence counsels cross examined DSS operative Sarah on happenings surrounding the alleged invasion of SERAP office last year.

Both counsels pushed the argument that the claimants’ names were not mentioned by SERAP, hence not justified in the claims before the court.
Sarah stated that SERAP’s allegations negatively impacted her reputation, that of her colleague, as well as the entire DSS.
After a session that lasted for about an hour, the judge adjourned to May 8, 2025, for continuation of definite hearing on the matter.

Ireti Kingibe, senator representing the federal capital territory (FCT), has kicked against the national assembly’s use of voice vote in approving the declaration of emergency rule in Rivers state.

On Thursday, the upper and lower legislative chambers approved Tinubu’s request for emergency rule in Rivers, using a voice vote.

The approval follows President Bola Tinubu’s declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers and the suspension of Siminalayi Fubara, governor of the state; his deputy, Ngozi Odu; and all members of the state assembly, over a protracted political crisis.

In a statement issued on Friday, Kingibe said the required two-thirds majority consensus “cannot be accurately determined by a mere voice vote”.

“As the senator representing the federal capital territory (FCT) elected on the platform of Labour Party, I, Ireti Kingibe, maintain a clear, firm and unequivocal stance on the recent declaration of emergency rule and the associated voting procedures conducted in the National Assembly,” the statement reads.

“I strongly oppose the use of voice voting for such critical, vital and constitutional issues. The Nigerian Constitution explicitly mandates that a state of emergency proclaimed by the President must be ratified by a two-thirds majority of all the members of each house of the national assembly.”

Kingibe said the senate standing order and house rules “mandate a roll call or electronic voting system to accurately determine numerical compliance for decisions of this magnitude”.

She added that the national assembly, as custodians of the Nigerian constitution, must uphold its duty of guiding the President’s decisions and ensuring that the rule of law prevails.

The senator also urge Nigerians to ensure they hold their representatives accountable for the decision on Rivers state.

“A two-thirds (2/3) majority is required for significant decisions like approving an emergency proclamation in the national assembly, and this level of consensus cannot be accurately determined by a voice vote,” she added.

“When a supermajority like two-thirds is needed, a recorded vote — whether through division voting, roll call, or electronic voting is necessary to ensure compliance with constitutional requirements.

“A voice vote is insufficient for determining a two-thirds majority in the National Assembly for an emergency proclamation. A formal recorded vote is crucial to confirm the exact number of lawmakers in support.

“National Assembly members are the direct representatives of the people, the voice of the people. Without a roll call or electronic voting, the people haven’t spoken and therefore cannot, should not and will not take responsibility for the President’s decision, as constitutionally required in matters of this magnitude.”