presidential candidates and this aids in their participation in the governance of the nation. That this is even more applicable to the Republican President. [10] In so arguing, the Petitioner called in aid decided cases from other jurisdictions in which courts have had occasion to pronounce themselves on the rationale behind the declaration of assets and liabilities. That in Wypych v Poland1, the European Court of Human Rights ruling on the admissibility of a complaint raised by a municipal leader asserting that the requirement to furnish his financial information was an unjustifiable infringement of his right to privacy, opined as follows: Finally, with regard to public access to the declarations...the Court considers that this is a safeguard to ensure that the obligation to make declarations available is subject to public scrutiny. The general public has a legitimate interest in ascertaining that local politics are transparent and internet access to the declarations makes access to such information effective and easy. Without such access, the obligation would have no practical importance or genuine incidence on the degree to which the public is informed about the political process. [11] In Union of India v Association for Democratic Reforms and People's Union for Civil Liberties2 the Supreme Court of India observed that voters and the public have a right to know relevant particulars of candidates in an election. Further, that this included information on assets and liabilities of candidates contesting elections to parliament. [12] The Petitioner also cited the national values of democracy, constitutionalism, good governance and integrity outlined in Article 8 of the Constitution. He argued that openness and transparency J6