5. THAT I have personally known of deaths of girls and women to have directly resulted from Female Genital Mutilation. 6. THAT I have known of some case where girls and women have lost their senses due to the trauma associated with Female Genital Mutilation; and other girls and women have suffered paralysis and lost their capacity to walk as a direct result of Female Genital Mutilation, thus being rendered disabled. 7. THAT use of same cutting implements on different victims endangers lives of Female Genital Mutilation victims because it exposes the victims to acquire HIV/AIDS. 8. THAT I believe that the cultural practice of Female Genital Mutilation has no medical and social benefits and violates human rights provided for under the Constitution of Uganda and international human rights Covenants such as The Convention on rights of the Child, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and is not justifiable in a democratic society. 9. THAT I swear this affidavit in support of the petition to the Honourable Constitutional Court to declare the practice of Female Genital Mutilation unconstitutional. 10. THAT what I have stated herein is true to the best of my knowledge, belief and information.” The respondent in its short answer to the petition opposed the petition as follows:“RESPONDENT’S ANSWER TO THE PETITION. 1. SAVE AS is hereinafter specifically admitted, the respondent denies all the contents of the petition as if the same were set forth and traversed seriatim. 2. In reply to paragraph 2(a) to (f) of the petition the respondent shall contend that no cause of action against the respondent has been disclosed in the petition. 3. In further reply to paragraph 2(a) to (f) of the petition the respondent shall aver and contend that it has not by any act or omission violated any provision of the Constitution. 4. The respondents shall contend that the petition is misconceived and does not raise any matter for constitutional interpretation under article 137 of the Constitution. 5. The respondent shall contend that the petitioner is not entitled to any of the declarations, orders sought in the petition.” The answer is supported by the affidavit of one GEOFFREY ATWINE stated to be a State Attorney in the respondent’s chambers who deponed as follows:“3. That I swear this affidavit in support of the respondents answer to the petition.