Mohbad’s family seeks delay in Liam’s DNA test, requests US lab details

The family of late singer Ilerioluwa “Mohbad” Aloba has asked the authorities to postpone the tissue-based DNA test scheduled for 31 October at Mainland General Hospital/IDH, Yaba, Lagos, as part of efforts to establish the paternity of the singer’s son, Liam.

The authorities scheduled the examination for 10 a.m. to help resolve the protracted dispute over Liam’s paternity.

In a statement sent to PREMIUM TIMES on Friday, the family head, Samuel Aloba, expressed concerns about transparency, sample handling and adherence to existing court orders.

The family stressed that its demands were not meant to frustrate the investigation or prevent the use of scientific methods to establish the truth. Instead, it wants the authorities to conduct the exercise independently, transparently and in strict compliance with the court’s directives.

The family statement read: “The Aloba family respectfully calls for the postponement of the DNA examination scheduled for 31 October

2026, pending adequate clarification of the outstanding concerns. The family reiterates that its position is not an attempt to obstruct the judicial process or frustrate a scientifically valid DNA examination. Rather, the family insists that an exercise of such profound personal, legal and public significance must be conducted transparently.

“Independently and in strict compliance with the order of court. Given the history of the matter and the concerns previously raised by the family regarding the handling of biological samples in the post-mortem process, the family considers it imperative that every reasonable safeguard be put in place to protect the integrity of the proposed examination and the credibility of its eventual result.”

Court directives

Furthermore, the family said its concerns stemmed from a 5 May court order directing the Lagos State DNA and Forensic Centre to conduct the examination using biological tissue recovered from the late singer.

The family expressed reservations about plans to collect the samples in Lagos and transport them to an unnamed laboratory in the United States for analysis.

It questioned whether the Lagos State DNA and Forensic Centre would conduct the examination itself or merely arrange the transfer of the specimens to the foreign laboratory.

The family maintained that allowing another laboratory to analyse the samples without first securing the necessary court approval could violate the court’s directive.

“This raises a fundamental question that must be answered before the exercise proceeds: Is the Lagos State DNA and Forensic Centre itself going to conduct the examination contemplated by the court, or is it merely going to collect and dispatch samples to another laboratory? The distinction is material. Where a court has directed that a scientific examination be conducted at a particular institution, the parties are entitled to clarity regarding the manner in which that directive will be implemented.

“If the designated centre intends to rely on a foreign laboratory to perform the actual analysis, the precise arrangement should be transparently explained and, where necessary, presented to the court for clarification or further directions. No party or institution should unilaterally substitute a materially different arrangement for the one contemplated by a subsisting court order without appropriate judicial clarification.”

“Family demands disclosure of laboratory details”

The family further urged the authorities to provide comprehensive details of the overseas laboratory expected to receive the biological samples, including its registered name, physical location, contact details and the identity of the institution undertaking the DNA testing.

They also requested verifiable evidence of the laboratory’s accreditation, staff qualifications, technical capabilities and track record in analysing tissue samples recovered from human remains.

The family argued that confidentiality should not stop concerned parties from confirming the laboratory’s competence or scrutinising the methods it intends to use.

“The precise scope of the examination: a clear explanation of the proposed scientific procedure, the samples to be examined, the tests to be undertaken and the manner in which the results will be generated and reported. The chain of custody: complete documentation showing how the samples will be collected, identified, labelled, sealed, preserved, transported, received and examined, including the persons responsible at each stage.

“Verification of receipt and examination: a reliable mechanism for confirming that the samples collected are the same samples received by the overseas laboratory and that those samples are the ones actually subjected to analysis. Reporting and accountability: clarification of who will issue the final report, to whom the report will be delivered, and what arrangements will be available to authenticate the report and address any legitimate questions concerning the methodology or findings”, said the family.

“More demands”

The family said its requests sought to establish basic safeguards that would ensure the exercise produced credible findings that could stand up to scientific and judicial scrutiny.

It further requested detailed information about the overseas laboratory, including its identity, accreditation and technical capacity to conduct the tests.

“Clear documentation and verification of the collection, preservation, transportation, receipt and examination of the samples. Confirmation of the precise role of the Lagos State DNA and Forensic Centre in implementing the court’s order.

“Adequate notice to all parties and their legal representatives of any rescheduled exercise. Judicial clarification or further directions wherever necessary to ensure that the examination proceeds in accordance with the court’s order. The family’s position is simple: there must be no room for avoidable doubt about the integrity of the process through which the truth is to be established.”

Possible interference

The family further warned that without adequate protective measures, someone could interfere with, replace or mishandle the samples.

While emphasising that it had not accused anyone of tampering with the specimens, the family insisted that the authorities must make the entire process transparent and subject every stage to independent scrutiny.

“For the avoidance of doubt, the family is not presenting the possibility of manipulation as a fact, nor is it asserting that the proposed examination has already been compromised. Its concern is that an inadequately transparent process could create opportunities for doubt, disputes or allegations concerning the authenticity and reliability of the eventual result.

“In a matter as sensitive as Mohbad’s DNA, the result must not merely be announced; it must be demonstrably reliable. The process must be independently verifiable, from sample collection to the final laboratory report. A credible DNA examination requires more than assurances from the institutions involved.”

The family said it would insist on answers to all outstanding questions and reject any process that denies the parties a fair opportunity to verify the eventual findings independently.

It argued that it had every right to put protective measures in place to guard against possible contamination, sample substitution, mishandling or other forms of interference.

It added that seeking such safeguards did not imply wrongdoing by any person or institution.

DNA examination

The family reiterated its willingness to use scientific testing to settle the paternity dispute but said transparency and accountability must guide every stage.

It further explained that its concerns extended to unresolved issues from the earlier post-mortem examination.

In support of its position, the family pointed to previous inquiries involving Dr Richard Somiari, Director of the Lagos State DNA and Forensic Centre.

It said the earlier autopsy failed to establish conclusive findings and alleged that subsequent checks showed that the foreign laboratory had no record of specimens submitted or registered in Mohbad’s name.

“The family’s apprehension is also informed by concerns arising from the earlier post-mortem examination conducted in connection with the death of Ilerioluwa Aloba. The family has raised questions regarding the role of one Dr Richard Somiari, whom it identifies as the Director of the Lagos State DNA and Forensic Centre and as a pathologist involved in the collection of samples during the Coroner’s Inquest. The family is concerned that the earlier autopsy result was reported to be inconclusive.

“Furthermore, the family maintains that, following enquiries, it received information indicating that the laboratory to which the samples were purportedly sent had not received the samples or any specimen registered in the name of Ilerioluwa Promise Aloba.

These assertions represent the family’s account of matters that require appropriate clarification and verification. They are not presented in this release as findings of a court or as independently established proof of wrongdoing by any named person or institution.”

The Aloba family called on the relevant authorities to address its concerns and meet its demands before conducting the examination.

The family said a transparent, well-documented procedure would safeguard the credibility of the DNA test, maintain public trust, and help resolve the paternity dispute fairly.

Backstory

This newspaper earlier reported that the court had postponed the paternity proceedings until 16 November and appointed a new officer to resolve the family’s concerns over the choice of DNA testing facility.

The adjournment followed the Ikorodu Magistrates’ Court’s approval of three DNA tests in February after singer Mohbad’s father, Joseph Aloba, renewed his demand for a court-supervised test to establish his grandson’s paternity.

The court selected two testing centres in the UK and another in the US.