This issue was framed at the request of the respondent who in its pleadings had raised the issue as a defence to the petition. At the trial, however, the respondent decided not to contest the petition at all. This meant that it abandoned the issue altogether. Though it remains the duty of the court to consider the issue, I do not see any compelling reason to doubt the wisdom of the Attorney General who must have felt that the issue had no merit. I would therefore hold that the petition raised serious questions for constitutional interpretation and the issue is answered in the affirmative. [6] THE MAIN ISSUE The main issue in this petition is whether the custom and practice of female genital mutilation [FGM] is unconstitutional and should be declared null and void. I have stated above that at the trial of this petition, the respondent stated that it did wish to contest the petition although in the pleadings it had done so. This, however, did not relieve the petitioner of the duty to produce sufficient evidence to prove that the practice, now commonly known as FGM, contravenes the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda. It is specifically alleged that the practice contravenes articles 2(2). 21(1), 24, 27, 33(2) and 33 of the Constitution. I shall now proceed to consider whether the evidence which was adduced proves on a balance of probability the alleged contraventions. THE EVIDENCE: The total sum of the evidence adduced by the petitioners to support their case is contained in the evidence of Ms Gertrude Chelangat Kulany, a female community activist form Kapchorwa District of Eastern Uganda. She is a member of the Sabiny tribe, one of the tribes in Uganda who practice the custom of Female Genital Mutilation. Her affidavit was reproduced in full earlier in this judgment. She does not state, for obvious reasons, whether she was a victim of Female Genital Mutilation herself but the gist of her evidence is that:(a) Female Genital Mutilation is carried out crudely without anaesthesia which makes the victim suffer excruciating, pain excessive bleeding which may lead to death, permanent main and trauma. (b) It is carried out by traditional “surgeons” who cut girls and women’s genitalia wantonly and often causes their victims urinary incontinence (failure to contain urine) which results in continued urinary odour and renders the victims social out casts. (c) She has knowledge of many deaths which have directly occurred as a result of Female Genital Mutilation. (d) She knows some girls and women who have suffered paralysis and capacity to walk and permanent disablement as a result of Female Genital Mutilation. (e) To her knowledge Female Genital Mutilation has no medical or social benefits to the community or its victims. This evidence was repeated by all other witnesses who gave evidence. It is not challenged and therefore this court treats the evidence as being the truth. The question then is whether a practice or custom which causes the above consequences contravenes any provision of the Constitution of Uganda. THE CONSTITUTION Article 37 provides“Every person has a right as applicable to belong to, enjoy, practice, profess, maintain and promote any culture, cultural institution, language, tradition, creed or religion in community with others.”