A man identified as John Emenike has reportedly been banished from his community in Enugu State for impregnating his own daughter, a development that has sparked outrage over the fate of the daughter who was also banished alongside him.
While the community’s decision to banish the father has been commended as a condemnation of what many have described as a barbaric and criminal act, questions are being raised over why the victim was subjected to the same punishment.
The central question remains: What exactly was the daughter’s crime? Was she not a victim of her father’s abuse?
If the intention of the community was to punish the perpetrator of this act, stakeholders have asked why the same community would punish the victim as well. By banishing both father and daughter, the community may be inadvertently exposing the young girl to further abuse or creating a situation where she is forced to continue living under the control of her abuser.
Child rights advocates argue that the daughter deserves protection, support, and justice, not punishment for the actions of her father. Impregnating one’s own daughter is a clear case of incest and sexual abuse, which by law and by morality places the father as the perpetrator and the daughter as the victim.
The case has once again brought to the fore the need for communities to adopt a survivor-centred approach to handling cases of sexual abuse and incest. Rather than stigmatization and banishment, the victim should be provided with medical care, psychosocial support, and access to justice, while the perpetrator faces the full weight of the law.
As at the time of filing this report, it was unclear what support systems have been put in place for the daughter, even as calls grow for the Enugu State Government, the Ministry of Gender Affairs, and human rights organizations to intervene to ensure the safety and well-being of the victim