In Utah State Democratic Committee v. Monson, 652 P.2d 890 (Utah 1982), the Democratic Party asked that the candidate's twenty-one-hour tardiness be excused because, among other reasons, the candidate had timely filed his federal declaration of candidacy form. Id. at 892. In Monson, the Democratic Party invoked the same argument advanced by the intervener Republican Party here: that statutory provisions mandating liberal application of the election law justified its candidate's access to the ballot. Id. at 893. The Court concluded that statutory interpretative directives cannot be employed to alter clear and inflexible statutory requirements. Id. Referring to the statutory provision that required a would-be candidate to timely file a declaration of candidacy form, the Court stated that legislative directives that election laws be liberally construed "avail us nothing because there is nothing to construe where there is no ambiguity in a statute." Id.