Court orders woman to pay back all maintenance money after 0% DNA Test results
HWANGE – In a landmark ruling that has ignited widespread discussion across Zimbabwe, a court in Dete – a small town along the Bulawayo-Victoria Falls highway – has ordered a woman to reimburse her former partner US$2,500 in maintenance payments after DNA evidence conclusively proved he was not the biological father of the child. This decision, which comes after seven years of financial support, underscores a growing national crisis of paternity fraud and highlights the urgent need for reform within the country’s maintenance laws.
Clean Nyathi, the man at the centre of this extraordinary case, had for years fulfilled his financial obligations, believing he was providing for his own child. However, a persistent doubt gnawed at him. His suspicions were ultimately confirmed by a DNA test, revealing a 0 per cent probability of paternity. The court’s subsequent order for Cynthia Dube, the child’s mother, to repay the accumulated maintenance has been met with a mixture of relief and vindication by many, while simultaneously exposing the profound emotional and financial complexities inherent in such disputes.
The narrative of Nyathi and Dube began in 2014, marked by a clandestine affair. Dube recounted how Nyathi pursued her while she was already in a three-year relationship, even enlisting her sister to persuade her to leave her then-partner. Their secret meetings took place in various locations, including trains and hotels in Bulawayo. The affair escalated when Dube’s primary partner discovered their relationship, leading to a violent confrontation that prompted her to move in with Nyathi. By this point, Dube was already pregnant with the child who would later become the subject of the paternity dispute.
Their cohabitation, though resembling a marriage, was fraught with instability. Dube claimed to have discovered Nyathi’s infidelity and found medication in his wardrobe, leading her to suspect he was unwell. The relationship eventually dissolved, culminating in Dube seeking maintenance payments through the courts. For seven years, Nyathi dutifully paid, with monthly contributions escalating from US$40 to US$50, and then to US$60, reflecting the rising cost of living in Zimbabwe.
Despite his compliance, Nyathi harboured deep-seated doubts about the child’s paternity. He observed the child’s development, searching for a resemblance that never materialised. “I always knew deep down that the child was not mine,” Nyathi stated following the court’s decision. “That is why I pushed for a DNA test.” His attempts to secure a paternity test were initially met with resistance, as Dube reportedly refused on three separate occasions. “She kept refusing when I asked for DNA. That alone raised suspicion,” he noted. The impasse was broken only when Dube threatened legal action for defaulting on maintenance payments. Faced with potential imprisonment, Nyathi took matters into his own hands, funding the US$450 DNA test himself to resolve the matter definitively.
The results were conclusive: Nyathi was not the biological father. This revelation prompted him to seek full reimbursement for all maintenance paid since 2014. The court’s decision to award him the US$2,500 has left Dube in a precarious position. Now married to another man and with two more children, she faces a significant financial burden, exacerbated by her current husband’s refusal to assist with the repayment. Dube expressed her shock at the DNA results and maintained her innocence, stating, “I did not steal anything from that man.” She added, “When the results came, I was shocked. I even feared for my child growing up without a father”.
Nyathi, while not actively pursuing immediate payment, has made it clear that he will not hesitate to return to court if the money is not repaid. He suspects the child’s biological father may be one of Dube’s other partners from that period, possibly a local taxi driver. He further highlighted that Dube has six children with different men, suggesting a pattern that contributed to his predicament.
This individual case, while compelling, is indicative of a much broader and deeply troubling phenomenon in Zimbabwe: a widespread crisis of paternity fraud. Recent statistics from leading genetic testing institutions reveal an alarming rate of men unknowingly raising children who are not their biological offspring. This issue has profound implications for familial trust, societal norms, and the legal framework governing child maintenance.
Global DNA Zimbabwe, a prominent DNA testing company led by Tinashe Mugabe, widely known as ‘The DNA Man’, has released figures that paint a stark picture. Their data indicates that a staggering 72 per cent of paternity tests conducted yield negative results, meaning that nearly three out of every four men who seek testing discover they are not the biological fathers of the children in question. Partners Chiriseri, a representative from Global DNA Zimbabwe, confirmed these statistics, stating, “The current statistics for people who have undergone testing are both shocking and interesting. Most clients come for paternity tests, and currently, 72% of the results issued are negative, while only 28% are positive”.
The National University of Science and Technology’s (NUST) Applied Genetics Testing Centre further corroborates this trend, reporting that approximately 40 per cent of their paternity cases in 2025 resulted in negative findings. These figures are not mere academic statistics; they represent countless individual stories of shattered trust, emotional distress, and the disintegration of family units across the nation. The emotional toll on men who have invested years of love, time, and resources into raising children they believed were their own is immense, often leading to psychological trauma and marital breakdown.
For generations, Zimbabwean society has relied on the traditional practice of nhodzerwa, or the ‘eye test’, to determine paternity. Nhodzerwa refers to a resemblance, a likeness, or something that reminds one of something else. It often describes a resemblance a child has to someone, which may or may not be their biological parents, or to something the mother was familiar with before the child’s birth. This cultural norm dictates that if a newborn child bears a striking resemblance to the father, paternity is affirmed. Conversely, a lack of resemblance often leads to whispers of infidelity and accusations against the mother, colloquially referred to as ‘jumping the fence’. However, modern genetic science has exposed the inherent flaws in this age-old custom.
Geneticists explain that physical characteristics are determined by a complex interplay of dominant and recessive genes inherited from both parents. A child may inherit traits from distant relatives, appearing dissimilar to their immediate father, yet still be his biological offspring. Conversely, a child might bear a superficial resemblance to a presumed father without any biological connection, as tragically demonstrated in the Nyathi case. The absolute certainty offered by DNA testing—results are either 0 per cent (exclusion of paternity) or 99.99 per cent (confirmation)—stands in stark contrast to the subjective and often misleading interpretations of physical appearance.
The prevalence of paternity disputes has spurred a significant movement for legal reform, particularly concerning the Maintenance Act. Critics argue that the current legislation is heavily biased, often leading to the incarceration of men who default on maintenance payments even when paternity is contested. This has prompted calls for a more equitable system that prioritises scientific verification before imposing criminal penalties.
Dr Believe Guta, a litigation specialist and resident of Kadoma, has been at the forefront of this advocacy. In July 2025, he formally petitioned the Parliament of Zimbabwe to amend Section 23 of the Maintenance Act [Chapter 5:09]. Dr Guta argues that men should not face criminal charges or imprisonment for failing to pay child support without verified scientific proof of paternity. His petition highlights the “irreparable harm” suffered by numerous men who have been wrongfully imprisoned, only for subsequent DNA tests to disprove their paternity. “Numerous men in Zimbabwe have been imprisoned… where paternity was either in dispute or subsequently disproved by DNA testing,” the petition states.
Dr Guta’s proposed amendment seeks to introduce a new subsection to Section 23, stipulating that no criminal proceedings under this section can be initiated unless paternity has been established through voluntary acknowledgment, a court declaration, or a DNA test conducted in accordance with the law. This proposed change aims to prevent situations where men are penalised for maintenance obligations without conclusive proof of biological fatherhood, effectively shifting from a “pay first, prove later” approach to one that demands proof before penalty.
The parliamentary debate surrounding this issue has gained considerable traction, with several lawmakers championing the cause. Notably, Honourable Spencer Tshuma, the Member of Parliament for Gokwe-Kabuyuni, has emerged as a vocal advocate for comprehensive reform. Hon. Tshuma has proposed an even more far-reaching initiative: mandatory DNA testing for all newborns before the issuance of birth certificates. He argues that such a measure would proactively resolve paternity disputes, safeguarding children’s rights to accurate lineage information and protecting men from the emotional and financial burdens of paternity fraud.
During a parliamentary session, Hon. Tshuma emphasised the importance of accessible and affordable DNA testing. He pointed out that the current cost of a DNA test in Zimbabwe, often exceeding US$400, is prohibitive for many citizens. By equipping public hospitals with the necessary testing facilities and subsidising costs, he believes the government can foster greater trust within families and the legal system. “So, DNA tests are important,” Tshuma remarked in a Hansard-recorded debate. “It is not [right to pay] maintenance whilst DNA tests are still underway”.
The societal impact of these paternity uncertainties is also evident in the emergence of “DNA parties” in urban centres like Harare and Bulawayo. These clandestine gatherings involve groups of men pooling resources to collectively afford DNA tests, driven by a desperate need for answers and often a fear of social stigma or the prohibitive costs of official channels. These informal initiatives underscore a profound erosion of trust within relationships and a societal yearning for scientific certainty in matters of paternity.
As the legal proceedings between Clean Nyathi and Cynthia Dube draw to a close, the broader implications for Zimbabwe are only just beginning to unfold. The court’s order for Dube to repay the maintenance serves as a powerful precedent, sending a clear message regarding accountability in cases of paternity fraud. It offers a glimmer of hope for other men who have found themselves in similar predicaments, navigating years of doubt and financial obligation.
However, for the child at the heart of this particular case, the legal victory for Nyathi is undoubtedly overshadowed by the harsh reality of a fractured identity and the complex emotional landscape that lies ahead. The child, once a symbol of a shared future, has now become a tangible debt, a living testament to a truth that took seven years and a significant financial outlay to uncover.
Zimbabwe now stands at a critical juncture. The nation must decide whether to continue its reliance on outdated traditions and legal ambiguities or to embrace the clarity and certainty offered by modern science. With parliamentary discussions actively underway to amend the Maintenance Act and a growing chorus of voices demanding scientific verification, the era of the subjective ‘eye test’ appears to be drawing to a close. The unequivocal message emanating from both the courts and the public discourse is clear: in the fundamental matter of fatherhood, only DNA provides the irrefutable truth.
