respect of which the fee is payable, shall have the same force and effect as if the fee had been paid.” The respondent did not take advantage of this provision. This was a serious omission on her part which the Court should condon. These affidavits for which no fees was paid and all the exhibits annexed to all the affidavits filed by the respondent in the petition cannot be accorded the full force and effect at law as if the fees had been paid in the first instance. The affected exhibits include inter-alia, all the Declaration of Results Forms, the tally sheet for Mukono County North Constituency, the Uganda Gazzette date the 27th March 2006 etc. On the proof of the alleged irregularities, commission of illegal practices and election offences including bribery on the part of the 2nd respondent personally or by his agents with his knowledge, consent or approval, once I held as I did, that the offence and illegal practices were not properly pleaded, then logically it followed that there was nothing to prove. There is therefore no need to belabor the question of proof of the same. However, I will make the following observations. The offence of bribery is provided for in S.68 of the Parliamentary Elections Act which provides thus-: “68 Bribery 1. A person who, either before or during an election with intent to either directly or indirectly to influence another person to vote or to refrain from voting for any candidate, gives or provides or causes to be given or provided any money, gift or other consideration to that other person, commits the offence of bribery and is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding seventy two currency points or imprisonment not exceeding three years or both. 2. A person who receives any money, gift or other consideration under subsection (I) also commits the offence under that subsection