The Department of State Services (DSS) has announced plans to take legal action against several media houses for publishing reports on September 9, claiming its operatives “raided” the Abuja office of the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, (SERAP).
This move follows SERAP’s refusal to accept responsibility for the reports, which suggested a DSS raid on its premises.
The DSS has demanded that SERAP retract what it termed a “false statement” within seven days, requiring the retraction to be made through the same media platforms, as well as in at least two national newspapers, to repair the damage to the agency’s reputation.
In a letter addressed to SERAP, the DSS reaffirmed its commitment to professionalism under its new leadership and warned that it would explore all legal avenues to address what it described as “unprofessional reporting” regarding its actions.
In response, SERAP denied being the source of the narrative and suggested that the DSS direct its retraction demands and requests for apologies to the media outlets responsible for publishing the story. The NGO argued that it could not be held accountable for the editorial decisions made by media organizations in response to its press release.
SERAP’s response came after a letter from the DSS’s counsel, Dr. Alex Iziyon, SAN, dated September 17, 2024. In the letter, the DSS expressed displeasure over a September 9 statement by SERAP, which allegedly gave the impression that DSS operatives had conducted a raid on its Abuja office.
The DSS accused SERAP of misrepresenting the facts of the visit, arguing that the NGO had created a misleading narrative. SERAP, however, maintained that its previous criticisms of the federal government’s decision to hike petrol prices gave them reasonable grounds to suspect that the DSS visit was intended as a raid.
Recall that on September 9, several newspapers and television stations reported that DSS operatives had raided SERAP’s office, drawing reactions from other civil society organizations. Some NGOs raised concerns about the accuracy of the reports, noting that the Freedom of Information Act and constitutional rights to freedom of speech should guarantee access to factual information.
