In her petition, the respondent sought the following orders: A) Hon. Bakaluba Peter Mukasa was not validly elected as a Member of Parliament for Mukono North Constituency. B) The election of the 2nd appellant as directly elected Member of Parliament be annulled and instead the petitioner/respondent be declared the winner of the Parliamentary election for Mukono North Constituency. C) In the alternative but without prejudice to the foregoing, a fresh election be conducted in the said Constituency. D) The appellants (then respondents) pay the costs of the Petition. E) Such other remedies available under the electoral laws as the court considers just and appropriate. The High Court allowed the petition and made the following orders and declarations, hence this appeal: A) That Hon. Bakaluba Peter Mukasa was not validly elected as the directly elected M.P for Mukono North Constituency. B) The election of Hon. Bakaluba Peter Mukasa as MP for Mukono North Constituency is hereby set aside. C) That fresh election be conducted in the said Constituency. D) The Electoral Commission and Hon. Bakaluba Peter Mukasa shall pay the costs of the petition to the respondent. The appellants appealed individually vide Election Petition Appeal No.1 of 2007 and Election Petition Appeal No.2 of 2007 which were later consolidated into Election Petition Appeal Nos. 1 and 2 of 2007. With leave of Court, both appellants filed an amended consolidated Memorandum of Appeal which reads as follows: 1. That the learned trial Judge erred in law and fact and denied the 2nd appellant fair trial when she considered and relied on specific particulars of alleged bribery not specifically pleaded in the petition and its attached affidavit to make findings that during the

Select target paragraph3