provisions invoked generally relate to all presidential candidates in the 2016 general elections and future elections. It is with this view in mind that we shall consider the Petition. [41] Before we consider the issues raised, we wish to address the arguments by the 2nd Respondent that the second relief was poorly drafted and vague and that the surreptitious attempt to amend it in the Petitioner's skeleton arguments would amount to ambushing and taking the other party by surprise. Our short answer is that indeed the second relief indeed is poorly drafted in the Petition and we will thus not consider it. We further wish to caution parties, especially litigants who are not represented, to ensure that their documents are properly drafted so that all their issues can be appropriately determined on their merits. [42] The Petition raises two pertinent issues: First; whether the 1st Respondent contravened Article 52 (3) by failing to publish declared assets and liabilities for President Hakainde Hichilema, and second; whether this Court can order the 1st Respondent to publish that information in the absence of legislation prescribing the same. [43] Regarding the first issue above, the Petitioner's position is that Article 52 (3) mandates the 1st Respondent to publish the declarations of assets and liabilities of presidential candidates, and its failure to do so was unconstitutional. It was his contention that this is supported by section 30 (1) (c) of the Electoral Process Act No. 35 of 2016 and regulations 11 (6) and 20 (2) of the Electoral J18