In her case, Sophia Momodu, Davido’s child’s mother, argues that Davido shouldn’t be given custody of their daughter at the Lagos State High Court in Yaba.
In her counter-affidavit opposing Davido’s custody suit, she stated, “The applicant is not fit to be granted custody of our daughter because he is not available and does not possess the ability to dutifully care for her
In contrast to Davido’s claim that he has always paid his debts, Momodu disclosed that their daughter was on the verge of being expelled from school because of unpaid tuition.
According to her, Davido only shown interest in their daughter when it suited his ego or public persona.
“He always used the condition of my making myself available for his sexual pleasures as a pre-condition to visit our daughter or show some fatherly love to her.
“The applicant apart from his cravings for sex only comes around to spend time with our daughter when he wants to use our daughter for his media stunts or promotions.
“The applicant has always been known to go away and stop communicating with our daughter, to stop making payment for school fees and/or payment of maintenance for our daughter whenever I refuse his sexual advances,” Momodu stated.
During a summer vacation in 2017, Momodu related an event in which she said Davido pushed her and their daughter out of his Atlanta house and had them stay with a friend.
According to Sophia, Davido only allowed her to see their daughter when she acceded to his advances.
“He would stop caring for his daughter and abandon her whenever I refused his sexual advances,” she said.
Momodu underlined that Davido made the decision to be an absentee father and that she has never refused him access to his kid.
Momodu clarified that she has been in charge of their daughter’s housing and well-being. She emphasized that when Davido fell behind on his school payments from 2021 to 2023, his father was forced to take over and pay them.
She stated that she pays the rent for the flat where she lives with her daughter, despite Davido’s assertions to the contrary.
“When I noticed that the intention of the applicant for coming late at night to my house was not to visit our daughter but to seek sexual favours even after our relationship had ended, I told him to desist from such late-night visits as our daughter who needed to be in school in the morning would have slept at the time of his late-night visits.
“It was when I refused the applicant ingress into my house at ungodly hours of the night on the pretext of visiting our daughter that he decided to stop visiting or calling our daughter and this has been the pattern with the applicant all through his relationship with our daughter.
“Whenever I refused to be his sex slave, he would stop caring for his daughter and abandon her and use the fact of our daughter’s sadness due to his absence to force me to accede to his unwholesome demands.
“I have never stopped the applicant or his family members from coming to visit his daughter, calling or reconnecting with our daughter,” Momodu stated.
Contrary to Davido’s assertion, the respondent claimed, he has not been dependable in covering their daughter’s tuition, as evidenced by defaults in 2021 and 2022 and a letter from the school to her in January 2023 regarding unpaid tuition.
“The school wrote via email notifying me that our daughter will not be allowed entry into the school except all outstanding fees from 2021 to 2023 are paid off,” she stated.
Momodu’s legal team, headed by Chief (Dr.) Anthony Idigbe (SAN) of Punuka Attorneys & Solicitors, had concerns during the court proceedings regarding the hearing notice that was published in a national newspaper and featured their daughter’s name several times.
In agreement, Justice A. J. Bashua directed non-essential parties to vacate the courtroom during the hearing and stated that the child’s name should not have been used.
Chief Idigbe cited Lagos State’s Child’s Right Law, Sections 143, 144, and 145, which safeguard a child’s right to privacy and best interests during judicial procedures.
He said that his daughter was put in risk by the suit’s publication and that this called for stricter security measures.
The matter has been forwarded by the court to the section on Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR).
