adminThe past few months have had the media talking about the controversial relationship between queen mercy of BBN and lord lamba.
The irretrievable broken relationship between the two has caused lord lamba to request custody of the child between himself and queen. This is particularly coming after it became no longer news that queen had gotten engaged to her new lover.
The two have gone ahead to accuse each other of their negligence as regards the welfare of the child.
The media has it that whilst queen had cried in a circulated video accusing lamba of not spending quality time with the child and also sending 150,000 naira monthly for upkeep of the child which was not enough according to her, lamba, lambasted queen for leaving the child in the care of other persons to go ahead to get engaged in the Uk with her new lover.
Whilst the above is the case between the two, the position of the law is seriously clear on the issue of custody.
Generally, under Section 12(1), Infant Law, either parents of a child may apply to court for the custody of or access to the child.
However, it should be noted that the law has set and laid some preconditions to be met before it can answer such prayer or petition by the parent who is bringing such claim.
By virtue of Section 71(1), Matrimonial Causes Act, it is the position of the law that “In proceedings with respect to custody of children of a marriage, the court shall regard the interest of those children as the paramount consideration, and subject thereto, the court may make such order in respect to those matters as it thinks proper”
Now, two things comes to mind which are, the interest of the child (ren) being the paramount consideration and the discretion of the court.
It goes forth to mean that in the awarding of custody of a child to either parent, the interest of the child would first be determined and secondly, what the court totally decides.
In determining what would equate to be the interest of the child being of paramount consideration, Karibi Whyte, a onetime Judge of the Supreme Court opined in the case of Williams v. Williams that “the determination of the welfare of a child is a composite of many factors.
Consideration such as the emotional attachment to a particular parent, mother or father; the inadequacies of the facilities, such as educational, religious or opportunities for proper upbringing are matters which may affect the determination of who should have custody.”
In the case cited above, the parties had separated and the wife to the marriage had refused to allow the husband not even see the daughter of their union or even pay her school fees.
The husband bringing an action for custody of the daughter had stated that the wife had no time for the daughter since she was always in court, leaving the daughter in the care of friends and that it would be best he sent her abroad to study in England. It was reached by the court that allowing the daughter to go study abroad was not in her best interest.
Obaseki, the then Supreme Court Judge opined that: “Education or the opportunity for education is in the best interest of a child if it is in a proper environment. For a child of tender years, education outside the proper environment, i.e., country or origin is bound to give a distorted view of life and cannot, in the final analysis, be in the best interest of the child.”
It should be noted that in the course of trying to determine the interest of a child, the court pays regards to specific factors and none of these factors are accorded overwhelming importance over the other.
Some of the factors which the court would take into consideration to determine the interests of the child includes but not limited to, wishes of the child, education and religion, conduct of the parties, the age and sex of the children, adequacy of arrangement for the child, wishes of the natural parents, medical and psychological factors, nationality of mother, putting brothers and sisters together, equality of parents.
One thing which the public should be aware of is that, at some point, when the court is determining who gets the child and takes into consideration the factors stated and sees that the parents falls short of them, the court has the power and discretion to place the children in the custody of a person other than a party to the marriage, i.e. a third party, as contained under Section 71(3), Matrimonial Causes Act.
In the whole, before the court finally decides who get custody of the child, a report from a welfare officer on the factors the court would base the interest of the child on would first have to be obtained by the court before it proceeds with it final verdict.
Put simply, if the court decides to base the interest of the child on the factors stated above, the report of a welfare officer on those factors would have to be obtained first by the court before deciding who it would award custody of the child to.
It should be noted that the child custody case between lord lamba and queen would only follow processes stated above and only a competent court of record can give its decision on same.
LEGALJOE also known as JOSEPH ALIU is a Law Graduate, Constitutional Law Analyst, Human and Social Rights Activists and a Legal Series Analyst @ogunwatchng and can be reached via aliujoseph085@gmail.com, 09131704196, 09085773212.
