Bride price, fondly referred to as bride wealth, is a long standing
customary practice in many African societies, including Uganda. Traditionally, it involves the
transfer of property, money, livestock or other items from the groom or his family to the bride’s
family as part of the process of contracting a customary marriage. Historically, bride price was
not conceived as a commercial transaction or a purchase of a woman, but rather as a symbolic
act signifying appreciation to the bride’s family for nurturing her, a seal of alliance between two
families, and a demonstration of the groom’s capacity to take responsibility for a wife and
future family. In many communities, bride price also performed legal and social functions, such
as legitimizing the marriage, conferring marital rights and obligations, and determining the
status of children born of the union.
Anthropologically, bride price functioned as social glue that integrated families and clans,
promoting communal harmony and accountability. However, with socio economic changes,
monetization of customary practices, and increased poverty and inequality, bride price in many
settings has gradually transformed from a symbolic gesture into a rigid and sometimes
exorbitant demand. This transformation has generated significant legal and human rights
concerns, particularly regarding the dignity, equality and autonomy of women within marriage.
In Uganda, bride price is deeply embedded in customary marriage practices across many ethnic
groups. Customary law, recognized under Ugandan law as a source of law, governs such
marriages subject to the Constitution and written law. Article 2 of the Constitution establishes
constitutional supremacy, rendering void any custom that is inconsistent with the Constitution.
Furthermore, Article 31 guarantees the right of men and women of marriageable age to marry
and to found a family, and it provides for equal rights in marriage, during marriage and at its
dissolution. These constitutional provisions form the normative framework against which the
legality and implications of bride price must be assessed.
The conceptual tension surrounding bride price lies in its dual character. On one hand, it is
defended as an expression of cultural identity protected under Article 37 of the Constitution,
which guarantees the right to enjoy, practise and promote culture. On the other hand, when
practised in a manner that commodifies women, entrenches gender inequality, or restricts
freedom to marry or divorce, it conflicts with constitutional values of equality, dignity and
freedom from discrimination under Articles 20, 21 and
- The law is therefore tasked with striking a delicate balance between respect for culture and
protection of fundamental human rights.
Ugandan courts have emphasized that culture is not static and cannot be invoked to justify
practices that undermine constitutional guarantees. In Mifumi (U) Ltd & Others v Attorney
General (Constitutional Appeal No. 02 of 2014), the Supreme Court acknowledged the cultural
significance of bride price but rejected aspects of the practice that perpetuate inequality and
injustice for example the practice of refunding bride price. This case conceptualizes bride price
through a constitutional lens.
Legal Regulation, Human Rights Implications and Judicial Interpretation
The legal regulation of bride price in Uganda is not found in a single statute but emerges from a
combination of constitutional provisions, statutory law and judicial interpretation. The
Constitution is the primary reference point. Article 33 specifically accords women full and equal
dignity with men and obliges the State to protect women and their rights, taking into account
their unique status and natural maternal functions. Article 21 prohibits discrimination on
grounds of sex, custom or culture. These provisions collectively constrain how bride price may
be practised and enforced.
Statutorily, the Customary Marriage (Registration) Act recognises customary marriages but
does not expressly regulate bride price. Its silence has allowed customary norms to continue
operating, subject to constitutional scrutiny. The Marriage Act largely governs civil and
Christian marriages and does not apply directly to customary bride price, yet its principles on
consent and capacity indirectly influence broader marital jurisprudence. The Succession Act
also becomes relevant in contexts where bride price is linked to inheritance rights and the
status of children, further demonstrating the far reaching legal implications of the practice.
The most authoritative judicial pronouncement on bride price in Uganda is found in Mifumi (U)
Ltd & Others v Attorney General. In this case, the petitioners challenged the constitutionality
of the practice of demanding refund of bride price upon dissolution of marriage. The
Constitutional Court initially upheld the practice of paying bride price as constitutional but
declared the refund of bride price unconstitutional. On appeal, the Supreme Court affirmed
that while the payment of bride price per se was not unconstitutional, the demand for its
refund violated constitutional principles of equality and human dignity. The Court reasoned
that refunding bride price treats a woman as property that can be returned upon failure of a
marriage, undermining her dignity and reinforcing male dominance.
Justice Bart Katureebe, writing for the majority, emphasised that cultural practices must evolve
in line with constitutional values. The Court held that compelling refund of bride price places an
unfair burden on women, often trapping them in abusive marriages for fear of financial
consequences. This reasoning aligns with international human rights standards, including the
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), to
which Uganda is a party. U