BY SAM ALFAN.
A woman who had sued former Nairobi governor Mike Mbuvi Sonko seeking child support has withdrawn the case.
While withdrawing the case before a Ngong Magistrate P. Ochieng, the woman claimed that she was promised Sh1 million to file the case against Sonko and soil the politician’s name.
She claimed that she was approached by two ladies from Mombasa County namely Zuhura and Latifa who promised her Sh1 million to file the case against Sonko, as he sought for nomination to contest for the Mombasa gubernatorial post.
She confirmed in the court documents that she was paid Sh240,000 in cash by two ladies.
“I have since searched my soul on the matter, considered against the defendant (Mike Sonko) and now wish to unconditionally withdraw both the chamber summons application and suits both dated the May 12, 2022 and further wish to extend my unreserved apology to both Sonko and Court,” said the woman.
She had claimed in the suit that Sonko had neglected his parental responsibility of taking care of their alleged 15-year-old daughter. The woman wanted Sonko compelled to clear the outstanding school fees balance of Sh37,000.
Sonko told the court he was shocked and unbelievable why the woman would claim to have been in a relationship with him “since 1999” and gave birth in “2007” then seek declarations of custody and maintenance in 2022 while all along, he was a well-known public figure.
“I unequivocally deny any form of relationship with the Plaintiff whom I don’t seem to be familiar to nor the minor mentioned therein and neither has the Plaintiff produced before this court any evidence of cohabitation, relationship or maintenance of the Minor aged 15years,” said Sonko told the children court.
Sonko added that the alleged birth certificate which appears forged or cooked does not bear his name. The birth certificate was issued on September 30, 2014 (7years) after the alleged birth of the minor thus raising more queries of its authenticity.
The politician had also termed allegations by the woman as malicious, defamatory and politically instigated to cast aspersions on his person. He added the allegations were proved that the woman had ill-intentions and ill-motives in filing the suit and claiming maintenance from myself yet there is no relationship whatsoever.
Sonko further told the children court that claims were frivolous and outrageous and meant to elicit emotional reactions from the court and the general public to whom the pleadings are shared to, contrary to Section 76(5) of the Children Act No. 8 of 2001 that prohibits children matters from being publicized.
He added that further the publication of this proceedings by the Plaintiff and her advocates may have actually caused more harm to the Minor who has now being exposed to the general public hence the alleged harm or emotional trauma they claim.
