A man in Kisumu has been granted wish to have his name struck from a child’s birth certificate after two DNA tests confirmed that he was not the biological father of the nine-year-old.
Justice Roselyn Aburili directed the Registrar of Births and Deaths in Kisumu West to issue a new birth certificate to the child without of FOA’s name.
The judge said it was clear that the information contained in the birth certificate dated April 27, 2023 on the father of the child was untrue and misleading.
“I hereby allow the application dated 16th November 2023 to the extent that the name of the applicant herein F.O.A. contained in the child’s birth certificate Entry No. xxx as the father of the child J.M.O. shall be deleted,” the judge said.
FOA did not deny that he allowed his name to be used to register the child during the issuance of the birth certificate.
However, the man denied that he sired the child after secretly conducting a DNA test. After moving to court, a second test was ordered and done by the Government Chemist in Kisumu, confirming that he was not the child’s biological father.
The man said he was involved in a romantic relationship in 2014 with the child’s mother when she fell pregnant. He said the woman made him believe that he was responsible for the pregnancy and started providing for her. He later became suspicious and stopped providing for them.
The woman reported him to the Children’s Department for child neglect and he was summoned to discuss the welfare of the said child. He was given access to the child as he agreed to provide for his needs.
FOA then privately took the minor for a DNA test to confirm his paternity. The results showed that he was not the child’s father. It was then that he moved to court to have his name deleted from the child’s birth certificate.
The child’s mother, identified as RAO, opposed the application.
She informed the court that she was a colleague to FOA, which is how they got to know each other. An intimate relationship developed thereafter, leading to the birth of the minor.
She said the man acknowledged the child to be his and even named him after his late brother as well as proposed the child’s baptismal name.
RAO said although they were not married, they had been co-parenting the child, who has grown up knowing FOA as his father.
She said when the child was joining school, she asked him for a copy of his national identity card to enable her process the child’s birth certificate, which he gave without a fuss.
She added that the report of the DNA test FOA had had done was not authentic and could not be used to determine the legal dispute.
Justice Aburili granted the parties time to negotiate for an amicable solution but this had not happened by the time they appeared before her on January 30.
She then ordered for a second DNA test at the Government Chemist at the man’s cost. The test confirmed the earlier results.
In her judgment, Justice Aburili said among the 12 rights of children, is that a child has the right to be registered. She said the national government must recognise a child’s name and national identity and children must be informed of their identity.
The judge added that Article 35 of the Constitution guarantees every person the right to the correction or deletion of untrue or misleading information that affects them.
She said the child therefore had the right to the correction or deletion of untrue or misleading information.
“There is evidence adduced beyond reasonable doubt from the two DNA reports filed in this court that the Applicant is not the biological father to the minor and he has no interest in the child having or using his name on the birth certificate which was only issued on 27th April 2023 despite the child being born on 10th February 2015,” the judge said.
