PENSIONER DISPUTES PATERNITY, CLAIMS HE CONSISTENTLY USED CONDOM
MBABANE - A pensioner has denied paternity of a 12-year-old child at the Peace Binding Court, stating he consistently used condoms during sexual encounters with the child’s mother, *Sonto.
The claims arose after Sonto reported *Musa for failing to provide financial support for the child, leading to a contentious examination of their past relationship and the conflicting claims of paternity.
Musa, who claims to have consistently used condoms during sexual encounters with Sonto, expressed his shock when she told him that she was pregnant. Speaking in court, he recounted their love affair, stating: “I told Sonto to be extra careful whenever we engaged in sexual intercourse because I was due for retirement in the private sector. I informed her that I could no longer afford to support a child at my age. Therefore, I made sure to use a condom at all times.”
The pensioner described his confusion upon learning of *Sonto’s pregnancy, saying: “Ngambuta kutsi sewutetfwala njani sibe sikhulume kahle kutsi lingenteki liphutsa, watsi kwenteke liphutsa”, which translates to: “I asked how she fell pregnant after we had discussed prevention methods, and she said it was a mistake.”
It was noted during the proceedings that Musa is in his late 60s, while Sonto, the child’s mother, is approximately 40 years old.
Musa said his suspicions intensified when he discovered two different men in Sonto’s rented flat on separate occasions. In one instance, he said he found a man named Vilakati asleep on Sonto’s bed, leading him to question the legitimacy of their relationship.
“I entered the house only to find a man reading the Times of Eswatini while sleeping on the bed. I sat on a chair, hoping Sonto would return to clarify the situation, but she was nowhere to be seen until the man left,” Musa recounted.
He further noted that local acquaintances informed him that the man was a frequent visitor to Sonto’s residence.
Supportive
Having been consistently supportive of the child until 2023, Musa claimed that he only did so to ensure the child could identify him.
However, a turning point emerged when the child approached him requesting school shoes, prompting Musa and his mother to acknowledge that the child was not part of their family structure, which led to further disputes regarding paternity and financial support.
In contrast, Sonto stood unwavering in her assertion that Musa was the child’s father. She vehemently denied his claims about their condom usage, stating: “Musa never had any problem raising the child until 2023, when he called to inform me that the child was not his.”
According to Sonto, Musa accepted responsibility upon learning of her pregnancy and even engaged in unprotected intercourse during the course of it.
Countering Musa’s narrative regarding the men found in her flat, Sonto clarified that the man (Vilakati) was her cousin, who often visited her home, noting that he had a girlfriend residing at the same compound. In her court appearance, she urged the court to compel Musa to contribute at least E500 towards the child’s maintenance, provide clothing and share half of the school fees, which total E4 500. The Crown highlighted that Musa had been uncommunicative regarding financial contributions until the matter escalated to court.
When expressing his concerns, Musa remarked on the difficulties of maintaining the child, particularly given the ongoing paternity dispute.
The court counselled Musa, asserting that the definitive solution to the matter lay in conducting a paternity test. Paternity Testing: In legal and medical contexts, DNA testing, can be used to determine biological relationships, such as paternity.
Comparing the DNA of a child with that of a potential father can reveal whether they share a genetic connection. Magistrate Sifiso Vilakati further advised Musa, stating that: “Human eyes could not determine paternity,” urging him to proceed with the DNA for clarity on his status as a parent.
Until the results are obtained, the court mandated that Musa contribute E500 towards the child’s upkeep, provide clothing and cover half of the school fees, amounting to E4 500.
*Not real names to protect identities.
Post your comment 





Comments (0 posted):