The determination of paternity of a child has been an age-long issue. Humanity has had to battle with the infidelity of womanhood. This infidelity has brought so much conflict among men who contend with one another over the fatherhood of a child. In traditional settings and customary law, men had to contend with issues pertaining to customary and biological fatherhood. Primacy was given to customary fatherhood over and biological fatherhood. The situation was such that when a husband died and the wife went into a relationship with another man, the children of the new relationship would be for the deceased husband, if the bride price had not been returned to the family of the deceased husband.
Again when spouses are separated without a formal divorce, the children of the wife’s new relationship belong to the old husband. The situation was adjudged to be repugnant to natural justice, equity and good conscience. In 1934, the Supreme Court decided that the biological father of the child was the real father of the child. However, in certain rural areas of the country customary fatherhood still exists and persists but the effect of the Supreme Court decision has neither been eroded nor corroded. The prevalence of such obnoxious customary law in certain places can either be attributed to ignorance or rustic simplicity.
In recent times, the courts have come out with important decisions on the paternity of a child especially as the global world is tilting toward perversity and lasciviousness.
The high level of immorality among married and unmarried women has popularised DNA test.
“DNA, that is, deoxyribonucleic acid,” is a molecule that contains the genetic code of any organism. It is hereditary and has become a euphemism for scientific analysis of genetic constitution to determine one’s roots.” (Page 256, Paragraph H)
PRONOUNCEMENT 2
On When The Court Can Order Dna Test
“Where a person is a minor (not mature adult) and his paternity is in issue, the court can order the conduct of DNA test in the overall interest of the child, to ascertain where he belongs.
“However, this is not the situation in the instant case where the appellant had a duty to establish his claim on the 2nd respondent, independently, and to produce such evidence to the court. Of course, if he elected to use DNA test to establish his claim, it was up to the appellant to go for it on his own, and/or woo the respondents to do so, without a resort to the coercive powers of the court, compel his adversary to supply him with the possible evidence he needed to prove his case (Page 257, Paragraphs B-C)
“Per MBABA, JCA at pages 256-257, Paragraphs H-A:
I doubt whether that form of proof can be ordered or is necessary to determine that paternity of a 57-years-old man, who does not complain about his parenthood, just to please or indulge a self acclaimed predator, who emerges to destabilise family bonds and poses as a biological father!
“I think it is only the 2nd respondent (mature adult) that can waive his rights and/or seek to compel his parents (or those laying claim to him) to submit to DNA test to prove his root.”
Pronouncement 3 On Whether An Adult Can Be Compelled To Submit To DNA Test:
“A court cannot order an unwilling adult or senior citizen to submit to DNA test, in defiance of his fundamental rights to privacy for the purpose of extracting scientific evidence to assist the appellant in the instant case to confirm or disprove his wish that the 2nd respondent – a 57-year-old man-is his child, of an illicit amorous relationship!
“I think appellant claims at the court below, founded on the obscene and reprehensible informal foundation immoral foundation, were a scandal and blackmail, which a sound lawyer would be ashamed to associate with.”(Page 254, paragraphs F-H)
PRONOUNCEMENT 4
On The Determination Of The Paternity Of A Child:
“If a party is claiming paternity, a court should be allowed to determine same on proof of evidence relating to paternity, which could only be done by referral for a DNA test of the parties involved. After such test, the court has a duty to declare the actual father of the child in dispute in consonance with evidence at its disposal.”[OLAYINKA V. ADEPARUSI (2011) LPELR 2697 referred to.]
(Page 256, Paragraphs F-G).
PRONOUNCEMENT 5
On Presumption In Respect Of A Child Within Wedlock:
“A woman has the right to say who the father of her child is, and of course, where a child is born within wedlock, the PRESUMPTION is conclusive that the child is the seed or product of the marriage.”(Page256, Paragraphs C-D)
And this PRONOUNCEMENT 5 was where Madam Ginger-hair got it all wrong!
PRESUMPTIONS
A PRESUMPTION is an assumption that is made in law that will stand as a fact unless someone comes forward to contest it and rebuts (disproves) it with clear and convincing evidence.
A REBUTTABLE presumption is an assumption of fact accepted by the court until rebutted (disproved).
Generally, all presumptions can be regarded as REBUTTABLE and the PRESUMPTION OF PATERNITY is no exception.
The presumption of paternity is reputable on the presentation of clear and irrefutable evidence to the contrary, as clearly stated by the Court of Appeal in the PRONOUNCEMENT 2.
Conclusion
In a nutshell, the CURRENT position of Nigerian Law is that when a MARRIED woman gives birth to a CHILD, her HUSBAND is 100 percent PRESUMED to be the father of the child.
And where the paternity of the said CHILD is in contention, upon the application of one of the parties, the court CAN and SHOULD order a DNA test to be conducted to determine the TRUE father of the CHILD.
Conversely, an adult is 100 percent PRESUMED to know his TRUE father.
And where the PATERNITY of the said ADULT is in contention, except the ADULT surrenders himself for a DNA test, upon the application of one of the parties, the court CANNOT and SHOULD NOT order a DNA test to be conducted to determine the father of the adult.

By: Chidi Enyie & King Onunwor