The petitioners seek the following declarations:(a) That custom and practice of demand and payment of bride price as a condition sine qua non of a valid customary marriage as practiced by several tribes in Uganda is unconstitutional; (b) The custom and practice of demand for refund of bride price as a condition precedent to a valid dissolution of a customary marriage is unconstitutional; (c) grant. Any other or further declaration that this Honorable Court may (d) No order is made to costs. The respondents contend that the respondents are not entitled to those declarations. The issues. In their joint Conferencing Notes filed into court on 20th July 2009, the petitioners and the 1st respondent set out the following agreed issues:(a) Whether the petition discloses issues for constitutional interpretation; (b) Whether payment of “bride price” before marriage and its refund during divorce are customs judicially noticed requiring no further proof; (c) Whether “bride price” means different things in the different cultures of Uganda such that the Constitutional Court cannot make a uniform interpretation of the custom; (d) Whether “okujuga” in Ankole does not mean payment of “bride price” and whether “okuzimura” in Ankole does not mean refund of “bride price”; (e) Uganda; Whether “bride price” is not commonly practiced by all tribes in (f) Whether the custom of payment of “bride price” by the groom’s family to the bride’s family promotes inequality in marriage, contrary to Art 21(1), (2) & (3) Constitution of Uganda which guarantees equality of person in all spheres including marriage; (g) Whether the demand for “bride price” by parents of the bride as a condition precedent to a marriage fetters the free consent of the man and woman 24