A Nairobi court has ordered that the name of a man be removed from the birth certificate of a child he has been raising. This is after DNA test results showed that the man was not the biological father of the child.
The results were confirmed by the child’s mother who then admitted that indeed, the man was not the girl’s father. The girl was born on January 2, 2023.
The case had seen the alleged father who was identified in the proceedings as MMK sue the mother who was identified as MWK for including his name in the child’s birth certificate even though he was not the father.
MMK, who lives in Switzerland, said that he had been in a relationship with the child’s mother. In August 2022, MWK told him that she was pregnant and that he was the father.
However, during court proceedings, MWK told the court that she consulted her doctor about the date she conceived and became certain that the baby could not have been conceived between July 1 and July 29 2022 when her partner was in the country for a visit. She however did not explain why she went on to include the man’s name as the child’s father in the certificate.
“I know the [child]. I was suspicious that I wasn’t the biological father. We requested a DNA test and received the report on January 2, 2024, which confirmed that I am not the father. I therefore ask the court to direct the Registrar to remove my name from the certificate,” the petitioner requested the court.
Why Kenyan men get rich in their 30s then go broke in their 40s
The child’s mother did not oppose this request and instead told the court that the child’s biological father was a man who was identified as DMK who had abandoned her immediately she informed him that she was pregnant by him.
The court determined that whereas every child has the right to know who their biological parents are, it would be unjust for a man who is not the biological father and who is unwilling to take on the role of a father to be forced to bear child’s responsibility.
This ruling was issued by Justice Stephen Riechi. “The father must be willing to take on the role of a father for the child’s normal and healthy upbringing. I do not believe that it is in the child’s best interest to impose the name of a man who is not the biological father and who is not willing to fulfill the role of a father,” Justice Riechi ruled.
