A court order issued by High Court Judge Stephen Githingi has created a fresh argument as to how a child’s paternity should be determined.
In a case filed before him by a woman seeking maintenance of a child whose dad denied being the father, Judge Githingi ordered that since the father did not give consent for his name to be on the birth certificate, the end result was that it is just a paper without any ties to him.
“I wish in that regard to state here that the appearance of a person’s name as a parent of a child on the birth certificate, where the authenticity of such birth certificate is not established and where a party disputes parenthood, the certificate cannot safely be held as prima facie (evidence that) the person named is the child’s parent,” Githingi indicated.
According to the judge, having a man’s name on a child’s birth certificate alone will no longer be taken as proof that he is the father.
The ruling comes only a few months after Justice Mumbi Ngugi empowered women to register the names of the men they have children with on their birth certificates, even without their consent. This was to be taken as proof that a man had fathered the child.
“Every child has a right to have its father’s name entered into its birth records. Therefore, children (born) out of wedlock (should) be at liberty to have names of fathers in the certificates,” Justice Ngugi’s ruling read in part.
After the ruling, Mr John Chigiti, lawyer for the petitioner in Justice Ngugi’s case, indicated that upkeep and morals would improve with the issuance of the new order.
“It is not a mere reprieve to women alone, it is expected that the number of upkeep cases will reduce and morality will be upheld in the larger society,” Mr Chigiti highlighted.
The new ruling, however, if faithfully implemented could see the return of high cases of “deadbeat fathers” — those who dodge their parental responsibilities.
