Man's name to be struck from birth certificate after DNA test

A court in Nairobi has ordered the registrar of births to remove a man’s name from the birth certificate of a two-year-old girl.

Justice Stephen Riechi directed that the name be deleted immediately after the mother confessed that the man was not the father. A DNA test also confirmed that he was not the biological father.

The Family Court, however, stated that all children deserve to know the truth of their origins by understanding who their biological father is.

On the other hand, the judge noted that forcing a man who had not fathered a child to bear that responsibility would be unjust.

“But that father must be willing to take on the role of a father for the child’s normal and healthy upbringing. In my considered opinion, I do not believe 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,” said Riechi.

The man, code named MMK, lives in Switzerland. He told the court that he would visit his then-girlfriend, code named MWK, once or twice. In August 2022, MWK informed him that she was pregnant and that he was the father.

However, the woman told the court that after consulting her doctor about the date she conceived, she was certain the baby could not have been conceived when MMK was in the country between July 1 and July 29, 2022.

MMK said that when he questioned MWK about the pregnancy, she was truthful. The two later met and mutually ended their relationship. However, MMK stated that MWK told him his name was on the birth certificate as the father.

“I know MWK. She is a former girlfriend. I know the minor. MWK is the biological mother. When the child was born, my name was included in the certificate as the father,” said MMK.

He added, “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 ask the court to direct the Registrar to remove my name from the certificate. That is all.”

The court heard that this prompted him to request a paternity test, which confirmed the truth. He said he visited the Registrar of Births and Deaths to have the information corrected, but was told he would need to go to court for an order.

MWK did not oppose the case. Instead, she explained that the biological father of the minor was one DMK. According to her, he abandoned her immediately after she informed him of the pregnancy, and the second man also denied paternity when approached.

The woman further stated that DMK did not offer any support during her pregnancy. The court heard that MWK and DMK have not communicated since the birth, and his whereabouts are unknown.

“I am the applicant. I am the biological mother. The child was born on January 2, 2023. She is one year and five months old. When she was born, I included MK as the father on the birth certificate. It was registered as such,” she replied.

She added, “MK is not the biological father of the child. I have disclosed that the biological father of the minor is DMK. I wish the court to rely on the supplementary affidavit.”

Justice Riechi stated that the case was clear, as both parties agreed that MWK’s name should be removed. However, he pointed out that the law protects children’s rights.

Justice Riechi asserted that whenever a minor is born, the parents are legally obligated to notify the government about the child.

“The best interest of the child is the main concern of this court. But I ask myself this question: Is it in the best interest of the child to impose the name of the first applicant, who is not the biological father and who is not willing to be named as the father?” posed Justice Riechi.