Ms Atimango Jeress, Mr. Sabiti Bernard, Ms Amaniyo Paula, Ms Agnes Joy Auro, Amuge Ann Grace, Nakirya Stella, Fr. Lawrence Ssendegeya, Okuni Joseph, and Achilu Daniel. The petitioners claim to be aggrieved by the aforesaid practices and seek the following declarations and redress:- THAT, the custom and practices of demand of and payment of bride-price as conditio sine qua non of a valid customary marriage practiced by several tribes (a) in Uganda, including but not limited to the Japadhola (found in Eastern Uganda), the Langi (found in Northern Uganda), and the Banyankole (found in Western Uganda) is unconstitutional. THAT, the custom and practices of refund of the bride-price as conditio sine qua non of a valid dissolution for customary marriage practiced by several tribes in (b) Uganda, including but not limited to the Japadhola (found in Eastern Uganda), the Langi (found in Northern Uganda), and the Banyankole (found in Western Uganda) is unconstitutional because:The demand for bride price by parents of the bride from prospective sons-in-law as a condition precedent to a valid customary marriage is contrary to Article 31 (3) of the Constitution that provides that marriage shall be entered into with the (i) consent of the man and woman intending to marry, because the demand for bride price makes the consent of the persons who intend to marry contingent upon the demand by a third party. The payment of bride price by men for their wives as demanded by custom from several tribes in Uganda leads men to treat their women as mere possessions from whom maximum obedience is extracted, thus, perpetuating conditions of (ii) inequality between men and women, prohibited by Article 21 (1), (2) of the Constitution of Uganda, which provides that all persons are equal before and under the law. The demand for refund of bride price as a condition precedent to the dissolution of a customary marriage is contrary to the provisions of Article 31 (1) of (iii) Constitution of Uganda in as far as it interferes with the exercise of the free consent of the parties to a marriage. The demand for bride price by the parents of the bride from the prospective son-in-law is as much as it portrays the woman as an article in a market for sale (iv) amounts to degrading treatment, prohibited by the Constitution of Uganda in Article 24, which guarantees that every person shall be treated with dignity. The petitioners are, hence, praying to this Court to:(a) Grant the declarations prayed for in paragraphs (a), (b) above; and (b) Any other or further declaration that this Honorable Court may grant; (c ) No order is made as to costs. The petitioners were represented by Mr. Stanislas Rwakafuzi assisted by Ms Jane Akuo. Ms Patricia Mutesi Principal State Attorney represented the Attorney General while Mr. Kenneth Kakuru, the 2nd respondent appeared in person. The Attorney General (hereinafter referred to as the first Respondent) in their answer to the petition denied all the allegations in the petition contending that all those customs were 12