2 ALAJOS KISS v. HUNGARY JUDGMENT applicant, but not the respondent Government, replied to those comments (Rule 44 § 5). THE FACTS I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE 6. The applicant was born in 1954 and lives in Rózsaszentmárton. 7. In 1991 the applicant was diagnosed with manic depression. On 27 May 2005 he was placed under partial guardianship. Although this measure was based on the Civil Code which deals with the pecuniary and certain personal relations of citizens (see paragraph 12 below), it nevertheless also attracted the application of Article 70(5) of the Constitution (see paragraph 11 below) to the applicant, excluding him from the right to vote. In the underlying court decision it was noted that he took care of himself adequately but sometimes wasted money in an irresponsible fashion and was occasionally aggressive. The applicant did not appeal against this decision. 8. On 13 February 2006 the applicant realised that he had been omitted from the electoral register drawn up in view of the upcoming legislative elections. His complaint to the Electoral Office was to no avail. 9. The applicant further complained to the Pest Central District Court. On 9 March 2006 this court dismissed his case. It observed that, under Article 70(5) of the Constitution, those under guardianship could not participate in elections. This decision was served on the applicant's representative on 25 April 2006. 10. In the meantime, legislative elections took place on 9 and 23 April 2006, in which the applicant could not participate. II. RELEVANT DOMESTIC LAW AND THE INTERNATIONAL LEGAL INSTRUMENTS CONSIDERED 11. Article 70(5) of the Hungarian Constitution provides inter alia that persons placed under total or partial guardianship do not have a right to vote. 12. The Civil Code provides: Section 1 “(1) This Act regulates the pecuniary and certain personal relations of citizens ...”