On the other hand dowry [Emihingiro] is never demanded. I have learnt that in some cultures in India, dowry is demanded by the parents of the groom from the parents of the bride. This however, is not the practice in most African cultures. At any rate, it does not seem to exist in Uganda. Secondly, dowry [Emihingiro] as practiced in Uganda is for the use and enjoyment of the bride and the bridegroom and not their parents or relatives. Thirdly, when the marriage breaks down, dowry [Emihingiro] is never refunded. I wish to make it clear again that in this petition, the dowry [Emihingiro] aspect of a customary marriage are not being challenged at all and do not form part of any issue for determination. It is the bride price [Enjugano] aspect of the customary marriages that is being challenged as being unconstitutional. Article 2 of the Constitution states:“2(1) This Constitution is the Supreme law of Uganda and shall have binding force on all authorities and persons throughout Uganda. (2) if any law or any custom is inconsistent with any of the provisions of this Constitution, the Constitution shall prevail, and that other law or custom shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be void.” [Emphasis mine] In this petition, the main issue for determination is whether the traditional custom of demanding bride price, practiced in many tribes in Uganda, contravenes any provision of the Constitution of Uganda. The petitioners contend that to the extent that bride price involves involuntary payment of money and properties in exchange for the bride, and the properties must be refunded on the marriage being dissolved, the custom is unconstitutional. The respondents contend that payment of bride price is a custom protected by article 37 of the Constitution which states:“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.” [Emphasis mine] Three issues have been condensed from a host of several issues originally agreed at the scheduling conference to make it easy to deal with only one broad issue of bride price. I have already stated the issues earlier in this judgment and I now proceed with them individually:ISSUE NO.1 This is whether the payment of bride price fetters the free consent of the persons intending to marry contrary to article 31(3) of the Constitution. This article states:- 58