Nairobi News


The truth about custody case of young girl filmed wailing inside courtroom

By Amina Wako January 14th, 2020 2 min read

The Judiciary has put the records straight on the case involving a young girl after a video went viral on social media showing the minor wailing and clinging on to her father inside a courtroom.

In a statement released on Tuesday, the Judiciary dismissed as false the impression created by the video that child’s mother had been granted custody of the child despite having neglected the minor for years.


The incident, which took place at the Mwingi Law Courts, attracted mixed reactions from members of the public who had bought the narrative that the mother had been given full custody of the minor.

But in the statement signed by Catherine Wambui, the Deputy Director Public Affairs and Communication, the Judiciary stated that child’s father and mother had been granted equal legal custody in a judgment that was made on September 12, 2019.

The Judiciary also clarified that the orders issued on the matter would have been implemented as from December 1, 2019 because the judgment was issued at a time when the girl was still in school and staying with her father.

“The mother was to pick the girl on December 1, 2019 which would give them ample time to bond and look for a school for her before January 2020,” the statement reads.

However, on the material day, the father failed to comply with the orders and on December 15, 2019 the mother went back to court to seek orders that the father is compelled to respect court orders.


The differences between the two parents went on until January 8, 2020 when they both appeared in court and their advocates asked the court to grant then time to settle the matter out of court.

According to the statement, it was agreed that the father was on January 9, 2020 supposed to hand over the girl to the mother and a children officer was to oversee the process.

“It was on the material day, January 9, that the video was taken and uploaded on social media with a view to painting the judiciary in bad light, and as an attempt to reverse the decision of a court unprocedurally,” the Judiciary stated.

The statement noted that the judgement was made before a competent court which looked into the interests of all the parties in the matter.

In addition, it revealed that the minor was not staying with her father but her paternal grandparents because the father was based 70km away from her