even a very old coin or such other symbolic items. Furthermore, there is no such concept as refund of ‘mutwalo’ “bride-price” in Buganda as it is in the Eastern region. I think it should further be born in mind that cultural rights or customs being directly related to an individual’s identity are very crucial to the enjoyment of all other rights. Their promotion and protection is a vital prerequisite for the completeness and fulfillment of a human being. The National Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy XXIV positively protect these cultural practices. Article 37 encapsulates it: “37…. Every person has a right as applicable, to belong to, enjoy, practice, profess, maintain and promote any culture, cultural institution, tradition, ….in community with others”. The respondents denied the existence of such a thing as price contending that no bride is offered for sale and no purchaser buys any bride – See paragraph 4 (a) of Dr. Mpayirwe’s affidavit. I agree with him that the term “bride-price” is a misnomer coined by colonialists who did not appreciate the meaning and significance of certain cultural rites and ceremonies which include the exchange of intrinsically unique gifts which are merely symbolic as a sine quo non of a marriage. These are a form of appreciation to the bride’s parents / guardians for her nurturing and upbringing. This valued customary practice should be clearly distinguished from what is obtaining these days when prospective grooms out of sheer egotism are obliged to take lorryfuls of goods to their future in-laws. This is an adulteration of the time-honoured ‘kwanjula’ – payment of the bride-price which is intended to be a very private ceremony at least in Buganda. Some also tend to confuse this with the Kinyankore custom of ‘okuhingira’ where a bride is sent off properly facilitated to start a home as stated by Mr. Kakuru. Ms Mutesi summed it all up by pointing out that there are various forms of marriage in Uganda legally recognized which do not involve customary rites / practices, from which the petitioners could choose, before seeking to abolish other people’s cultures. I observe that all the deponents of the affidavits in support of the petition concentrated on incidences of domestic violence allegedly consequent upon failure to effect refunds of brideprice. I found this evidence lacking in data. Domestic violence is a worldwide plight to women/men which has received United Nations’ attention - The Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women – (General Assembly Resolution 48/104 of 1993) specifically enjoins member states to pursue policies to eliminate violence against women. The Domestic Violence Bill is still in the offing, hopefully the Act will soon emerge to take care of the situation. Curiously, violence is more prevalent in countries where the term ‘bride-price’ is unheard of, with the exception of India, but even in the case of India it is the payment of insufficient dowry by the bride which is the cause of domestic violence and suicide. It is not due to “bride-price”. I thus conclude by saying that in face of the divergent cultural beliefs and practices with different people valuing their own, courts should not be quick to extract them by slapping a blanket declaration banning them on ground of unsoundness. This would rob the various 16