Sophia Momodu, the mother of Davido's daughter, has informed a Lagos State High Court in Sabo, Yaba, that the artist should not be granted custody of the child.

Momodu told the court on Friday that the applicant was unfit to be granted custody of their daughter because he is constantly unavailable and lacks the ability to care for her.

She asserted this in a counter-affidavit submitted in response to Davido's custody lawsuit.

She claims that during their relationship, Davido never demonstrated genuine dedication or love for their daughter.

"He always demanded that I make myself accessible for his sexual pleasures before visiting our daughter or showing her some fatherly love.

''Aside from his desire for sex, the candidate only spends time with our daughter when he wants to utilize her for media stunts or promotions.

"The applicant has always been known to go away and stop communicating with our daughter, to stop making payments for school fees and/or maintenance for our daughter, whenever I refused his sexual advances," she told me.

The respondent said that Davido once threw her and their daughter out of his home in Atlanta, Georgia, during a summer vacation in 2017, and they ended up squatting with a friend.

Momodu maintained that she never refused Davido access to his daughter, and that he decided to be "an absentee father."

She also stated that she was responsible for her housing and that the artist had always had access to their daughter until he chose to abuse it by visiting at odd hours to demand sex.

"When I discovered that the applicant's intention for coming late at night to my house was not to visit our daughter but to seek sexual favors, even after our relationship had ended, I told him to stop such late-night visits, as our daughter, who needed to be at school in the morning, would have slept during his late-night visits.

"When I opposed the applicant's entry into my home at ungodly hours of the night under the guise of visiting our daughter, he decided to stop visiting or phoning our daughter, and this has been the pattern with the applicant throughout his connection with our daughter.

"Whenever I refused to be his sex slave, he would cease caring for his daughter and forsake her, using our daughter's misery as leverage to force me to comply with 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," she pointed out.

The respondent reiterated that, contrary to Davido's allegation, he has not been faithful in paying their daughter's school fees, having defaulted in 2021 and 2022, with the school writing to her in January 2023 about unpaid tuition.

"The school wrote via email notifying me that our daughter will not be allowed entry into the school unless all outstanding fees from 2021 to 2023 were paid off," according to her.

Momodu informed the court that Davido's father had intervened and paid the school expenses.

She added that, contrary to Davido's claims, she has been the one paying the rent for the flat where she lives with her daughter, and that Davido has not purchased a house for them.

The respondent reiterated that, contrary to Davido's allegation, he has not been faithful in paying their daughter's school fees, having defaulted in 2021 and 2022, with the school writing to her in January 2023 about unpaid tuition.

"The school wrote via email notifying me that our daughter will not be allowed entry into the school unless all outstanding fees from 2021 to 2023 were paid off," according to her.

Momodu informed the court that Davido's father had intervened and paid the school expenses.

She added that, contrary to Davido's claims, she has been the one paying the rent for the flat where she lives with her daughter, and that Davido has not purchased a house for them leave the courtroom during the hearing.

Before they left, Chief Idigbe, with the court's consent, brought the press's attention to Section 143 of Lagos State's Child's Rights Law 2015.

It states that in a case involving a juvenile, no one other than the court's members and officers, as well as the parties to the case, may attend court.

It also states that their solicitors and counsel, parents and guardians of the kid, and any parties intimately involved in the case were free to enter."

Chief Idigbe also cited Section 144 of the legislation, which forbids the publication of a child's name.

The clause begins with the following: "No person must publish the name, address, school, photograph, or anything likely to lead to the identification of a child in a matter before the court, except as required by the provisions of this law."

He also cited Section 145 of the Child Rights Law, which states that "the proceedings in court must be conducive to the best interests of the child and must be conducted in an atmosphere of understanding, allowing the child to express himself and participate in the proceedings."

In his counter-affidavit, Momodu criticized the suit's publishing in a major newspaper.

"The petitioner (Davido), by publishing this litigation in a major publication, has put our daughter in grave danger.

"I would have to implement extra security measures to ensure the continued safety of our daughter in school," she told me.

At the conclusion of the proceedings, it was revealed that the court submitted the case to the Alternative Dispute Resolution branch of the court for possible settlement during Settlement Week.