Nairobi Senator Mike Sonko
Nairobi Senator Mike Sonko has owned up he is the father of a son of a woman in Kwale who has sued him for child support.
Sonko admitted that the two were long time lovers and that he fathered the woman’s first-born child, but denied being the father of the second child.
The flamboyant senator has vowed to fight the suit that seeks to commit him to provide for the two children.
Sonko told The Standard that he is yet to be served with the suit papers in the case filed early last month. He further claimed that he bought the woman a car, which he later confiscated, and stopped giving her money after they disagreed.
Josephine Thuku wants the court to force the senator to provide her with a monthly maintenance of Sh140,000 that includes Sh100,000 for food and upkeep, Sh10,000 for clothing, Sh10,000 for medical expenses and Sh20,000 as house allowance.
Sonko said he is ready for the case, adding that he does not need a lawyer in “a straightforward matter like this one.”
Coincidentally, the woman also says she does not intend to hire a lawyer because; “I am afraid a lawyer will be compromised,” without elaborating.
When The Standard spoke with the senator, he admitted knowing Ms Thuku and admitted that she was his girlfriend but claims he only fathered a boy-child with her and not two as the woman claim.
“I know this woman and her first born is my child whom I am taking care of by paying school fees,” he said adding that Thuku has access to a supermarket where she shops at his expense.
“I am not the father of the second child and I am ready for a DNA test if she insists,” Sonko said adding that he can support the second child on ‘humanitarian’ grounds.
The Nairobi senator further claimed that he does not discriminate against the second child. “ Whenever I shop for my son, I also include the other child in my shopping list. I however, do not give a single penny to their mother,” he said.
Thuku mentions in the case file that she had a romantic relationship with the defendant (Mbuvi) when she was still in college.
“On August 17, 1999 the plaintiff and the defendant got a male child out of wedlock but thereafter the relationship between the two turned sour,” it reads in part.