EXHIBIT “B”

RULE 44

Application
in
compliance with the requirements of the procedural order
under Chapter III of the commission’s rules

The Applicant: Michael Kapoustin

48 years of age
Canadian national
Sofia Central Prison
13th division
21 Gen. Stoletov Str.
Sofia 1309, Bulgaria

The Representative: The Applicant represents, ex officio, according to

Article 43 para 2 that class of individuals or
group targeted for persecution as listed under
the attached appendices as Victims of the
Defendant

The High Contracting Party: The Republic of Bulgaria

Statement
of
Facts, Convention Articles
Objectives and Arguments

Part I – The Application

This application is submitted by the Applicant, Michael Kapoustin, an unsentenced

prisoner in accordance with Title III Chapter I Rule 32 of the European Court on Human
Rights Rules of Procedure, hereinafter the “ECRP”. The Applicant has undertaken to
represent ex officio the 145 individual victims, their heirs or successors named in the
Appendix attached hereto and made a part thereof. Furthermore the applicants named
therein represent a class of injured parties defined herein as being all HIV sero positive
individuals. This class is a party to this action. The Applicant further includes 393 Libyan

1
victims, their heirs or successors as appended hereto and made a part thereof but not
individually named herein.

The named and unnamed applicants in the Appendix and the class identified together
with the Applicant himself herein shall be, for the purposes of this application,
collectively referred to for clarity as the “Plaintiffs”. This action which the Plaintiffs seek
to institute is against the Republic of Bulgaria, a signatory to the convention and a High
Contracting Party thereto and therefore subject to the provisions of the ECHR and liable
to pay compensation to the Plaintiffs cited as being the class targeted for official
persecution and extermination.

The High Contracting Party, Bulgaria, its institutions, officials and representatives are
herein, for the sake of clarity collectively referred to as the Defendants.

The claim made is evidenced by documented violations of the Plaintiffs human rights
under Article 1 ECHR Protocol I (1952). This is factually and circumstantially
established. The consequences suffered by the Plaintiffs is due in part to the unlawful
seizure and refusal to deliver a unique medicine vital to their health, well being and
longevity of life. The seizure and infection was inflicted, with malice and forethought, or
in the alternative ambivalence to discrimination by the Defendants who sought to
precipitate the death of the target class as part of a policy to eliminate the threat posed
society by the targeted class. In the alternative they sought to attack an ethnic, religious or
national group with HIV, the virus which causes AIDS.

As a consequence of this action the Defendants knowingly did subject the Plaintiffs to
inhuman and degrading punishment as well as needless suffering and loss of life.

The pain and suffering to which the Plaintiffs were subjected by government agencies
and officials of the Defendant, Bulgaria must be considered deliberate torture since the
psychological and physiological effect upon the victim was understood by officials of the
Defendant, Bulgaria.

This act was a part of a covert, state sponsored, action against the Plaintiffs nationality,
race and status as HIV/AIDS seropositive and the Applicant as their sponsor. The actions
in evidence by officials of the Defendant, Bulgaria indicate an effort to assist in the
genocide of that class of applicant as setout. Both within and outside the territory of the
Defendant, Bulgaria.

The aforesaid documented acts in evidence constitute by their nature and character a
violation of Article 14 in conjunction with Articles 3 and 2 para 1 of the convention. The
Defendants discrimination towards the targeted class is demonstrated by a policy to deny
them medical care or to indiscriminately allow infection with HIV. In so doing and in so
understanding the consequences of their act, the Defendants tortured the targeted class
and knowingly did facilitate their premature death.

The Victims application is filed ex officio by the Applicant due to the unique status
merited by the difficult physical and material status of the Plaintiffs. It is pleaded that the
circumstance of the Applicant’s present detention and the illness or deaths of the
2
individual Victims, together with the scope of suffering caused and continuing to be
inflicted upon the surviving members of that class by the Defendant is adequate grounds
for:

1. The ECHR to give urgency and precedence to this application as is

procedurally provided for under Rules 33 and 34 of the ECRP proprio mutu.

2. Further, due to the urgency and in accordance with Chapter III Rule 44 of the
ECRP the Applicant, on behalf of the Plaintiffs, pleads the President of the
Commission to wave the requirement setout therein for this submission to be
upon an official form as yet not provided this Applicant. Thereby accepting
this as the formal application and in compliance and of sufficient character to
satisfy Rule 44.

3. The Applicant and Representative(s) of the Plaintiffs as setout are qualified as

a “non-government group” representing the interests of those individuals
listed as victims and as further qualified as a group of victims according to
that class, as identified. This is in compliance with Article 25 of the
convention as is the naming of the Republic of Bulgaria as Defendant against
whom this complaint is filed.

4. This application is in accordance with Article 26 of the Convention in that the

Applicant and Representative are unable to exercise any legal right to seek a
remedy under the National law of the High Contracting Party. The individuals
cited as victims in the appendices attached hereto are not legal residents of the
Republic of Bulgaria and are therefore unable to secure redress in its domestic
courts according to civil or penal law. Furthermore the Defendant Bulgaria is
imprisoning the Applicant without sentence or cause, suppressing evidence
and tormenting him.

The Defendants have beaten and tormented the Applicant, denied him his
freedom and as well have hidden or destroyed documents and material
evidence during the period in question in order to conceal violations of the
ECHR. The Applicant wishes to file a complaint to the commission on
violations against his person.

5. The Plaintiffs plead the Commission, prior to ascertaining the admissibility of

this application, exercise Rule 45 para 3 of the ECRP. The nature of the
application, its urgency and the continued suffering being inflicted by the
Defendant’s refusal to recognize or acknowledge the injury it has caused and
continues to cause demands immediate action by the commission. This
Applicant pleads this to be morally and ethically binding upon the
commission.

6. The Applicant further pleads the commission facilitate and grant the Plaintiffs,
their heirs or successors, as victims, legal aid. It is essential to the Victims in
that they, and the imprisoned Applicant on their behalf, do not have sufficient

3
 means to meet all or even part of the costs associated and essential to the
proper discharge of the Commission’s duties and preparation of their cases.

It is a moral and ethical obligation to the class of victims identified herein as Plaintiffs
that this application be heard. That their silent pain ravaged voices be afforded the best
representation possible. The violation by the Defendant, Bulgaria, in intentionally and
with malice denying a medicine and technology known to relieve suffering and prolong
life is a crime against humanity. To permit 393 children of the targeted class to be
infected with HIV is incomprehensible. This is a crime manifested by a clandestine state
sponsored or tolerated fascist doctrine to commit genocide using HIV/AIDS. A state
enacted strategy to utilize a fatal disease to eliminate that disease together with a class of
human being whose sexual orientation, race, and national origin are not in keeping with
official doctrine.

This crime must be exposed and redress afforded its victims. The suppressed technology
and data must be released to its rightful owners and damages awarded the Victims of this
crime.

The damages awarded must be of such a character and public nature that it shall
serve as an example to any future government, which evades the doctrine enshrined
in the ECHR.

The circumstances surrounding this case and the consequences to the Plaintiffs and their
families exceed reason or qualifiable explanation by the Defendant, Bulgaria. A Council
of Europe member that has tarnished not only its credibility as a democratic society but
the quality of judgment made by free, humane and democratic Europe in accepting or
considering its application to membership.

This present and new government of Bulgaria may well claim no responsibility. But the
institutions and officials responsible for this atrocity remain functional and without public
or private remorse.

I respectfully submit that this is intolerable and ask your immediate intervention on
behalf of the dead and dying. I plead you to protect me from retribution for having set
this before you.

Part II – Objective and Pleadings

The Applicant and class of individual and group identified have been and are the targets
of a policy of persecution effected by the Defendant. This application seeks to:

1. Commence a judicial investigation and litigation against the Defendant,

Bulgaria for that state’s persecution of a class of victim identified as the
individuals listed here or being any individual member of that group defined
as that national and global minority being HIV seropositive, homosexual or of
a high risk racial group or discriminated nationality. Further included in this
4
 class are all persons of the discriminated class intentionally or ambivalently
infected with HIV.

2. Institute an in-depth and public investigation of the alleged violations and

crimes during the years of 1984 through 1998 as effected against the targeted
class. The Applicant as Representative has knowledge and documented
evidence of the alleged conduct and its direct consequence to the targeted
individuals and group from the period of 1995 to date.

3. Through public disclosure and discourse establish contact with the surviving
Victims or in the alternative their heirs or successors. To plead they come
forward and identify themselves to the court and provide testimony and
evidence without fear of retribution.

4. Obtain an order of the Court directing institutions and officials of the

Defendant, Bulgaria to immediately return or provide compensation for
illegally seized medical supplies, research data, raw material and other
technological data seized from the Applicant and Victims and having been lost
or destroyed by the Defendant.

5. Seek that the court end the on going official obstruction to the manufacture
and delivery of the medical substance cited under the case and intentionally
denied the targeted class and surviving Victims, if any, of the conduct alleged.

6. Establish a legal precedent upon the merit of the facts and circumstances as
setout herein. Whereupon subsequent to the hearing of the Parties, a decision
is secured in favor of the Victims as grounded by the High Court upon the
applicable law and the common moral values and compassion considered an a
priori by citizens of every democratic, civilized and open society. A quality of
character and culture of tolerance accepted as being ethically incumbent upon
all members of society. This a priori to be reflected in a decision expressing
such in a Ruling to be issued by the presiding justices against the Defendants.

7. Enshrine in that Ruling a punitive part wherein shall be embodied material

compensation to the Victims, their heirs or successors. The quality and
severity of which sets out to the Defendant and posterity that the High Court
and Council of Europe will not and can not tolerate conduct by its members,
which is abhorrent to its humanity.

8. Embody in that Ruling the eloquent clarity for which this court is recognized.
The language therein to state decisively and in no uncertain terms that:

a) It is intrinsically wrong and in fact a crime against not only the

person of the Victim but Humanity itself for any official of a
member state to excuse, condone or effect a policy to seize,
obstruct, withhold, withdraw or otherwise deny a life
sustaining substance with the calculated and premeditated
intent to cause the torture and death of a certain class of
5
 individual or group officially targeted for persecution and
extermination by individuals or groups within institutions of
the Defendant, Bulgaria. A policy effected by them to control,
eliminate and reduce costs in the treatment of a diseased group,
race or nationality. As is the instance under the case of 145
United States citizens as identified; 393 Libyan children as
setout in a February 28, 2000 Indictment to the High Court of
Libya; 36 unidentified Bulgarian Romas and an as yet
unestablished number of Negro, Arab and Asian nationalities in
and out of Bulgaria. The latter being members of the
discriminated against and targeted for persecution racial, ethnic
and religious groups.

b) It is further intrinsically wrong and in fact a crime against not

only the person of the Victim but humanity itself for the
Defendant, Bulgaria to condone or excuse an official act by
which its representatives either premeditatedly or through
negligence infected with the HIV virus or in the alternative
denied therapeutics to members of the targeted class.

Having done so with the official objective or ambivalent hope to cause

the psychological and physical torture of the persecuted class and to
precipitate their imminent death. As is the instance under the case of
393 Libyan children.

c) The crime evidenced by the aforestated is compounded by the

Defendant Bulgaria’s intent to eliminate the targeted class by
using the HIV virus or in the alternative their ambivalence
towards those officials so inclined.

d) The indirect mechanism, methodology or in the alternative

negligence utilized to effect this state policy of persecution and
genocide or in the alternative a doctrine of discrimination and
indifference does not constitute a mitigating factor to the
viciousness and inhumanity of the resulting consequences.

e) The pretence of protecting society as a whole or ignorance of

the Defendant is groundless and represents a mitigating
circumstance insufficient for acquittal.

f) The apparently passive means employed, evidenced under the

case as being the denial of medicine essential to the health and
life of the targeted class or the negligent introduction of HIV
tainted blood does not mitigate or reduce in its severity the
psychological torment, physical torture and death, which the
Victims experienced as evidenced by this deliberate crime.

6
g) It is the objective of the method and its premeditated quality or
disconcerting negligence, which are the prevailing issues. The
method employed is of no consequence to the subject of the
crime and conduct alleged. Official agencies of the Defendant,
Bulgaria sought to and in fact did eliminate from society a
certain class of individual or group by precipitating their death
in the means identified as well as by the imprisonment and
isolation of their supporters.

h) The Defendant, Bulgaria, did with premeditation seek to

distance themselves from incrimination by employing an as
seemingly benign and impersonal means as possible to effect a
policy of persecution. In so doing they it could further an
official goal to eliminate from society the class in question and
therefore, according to the Defendants twisted logic, control
undesirable minorities and the HIV infection by using the virus
to eliminate by infection the targeted class.

i) In the alternative the Defendant Bulgaria should have sought to

identify and deny opportunity to the institutions and officials
giving effect to this policy of discrimination and genocide. The
fundamental objective of which was to remove a perceived
threat to the well being of a white society. A threat embodied in
the HIV seropositive or homosexual quality of the Victims as
well as their race, nationality, religion and political
demography. This policy, clearly being without social or
scientific merit, was formulated upon the principles of a
morally bankrupt administration of the Defendant Bulgaria,
which elected to continue a fascist era edict.

j) The criminal acts in question were formulated and

implemented upon the pretence of protecting society from
undesirable elements and improving the state budget and self
enrichment. Those responsible claim the undertakings in
question were effected in observation of the law and fulfillment
of their official responsibility to the culture and moral
convictions of the Defendant Bulgaria. This is without merit.

k) The facts and circumstances evidencing two separate but

related incidents provide overwhelming objective and
subjective support of the Plaintiffs accusations. The Defendant
Bulgaria’s sovereignty as a state, or its negligence or
ambivalence towards fascist and discriminatory elements
within its institutions does not afford it a defense. The
Defendant Bulgaria must bear the responsibility for the
criminal acts effected by officials and institutions which have
caused the illness and death of hundreds of human beings
outside the borders of the Defendant.
7
 l) Further and in the alternative the Defendant Bulgaria must
assume responsibility to the Victims for failing to identify and
to act forcefully to end the discrimination, torture and murder
evidenced under the case. Responsibility for further failing to
act quickly to reduce the pain, suffering and loss of life of the
targeted class resulting as a consequence of acts undertaken by
its representatives is the Defendant Bulgaria’s and Bulgaria’s
alone.

9. Prove the Corpus delicti of the crime is disturbing in its quantity,

quality and consequences to the lives of the Applicant and the targeted
class.

10. Show the obvious evidence of the suffering and tortured deaths of the
individual Victims named and loss suffered by their families. The
consequences to the yet nameless and not established numbers are
staggering and overwhelming to the imagination. The suffering
caused all classes of Victim particularly 393 children is not open to
interpretation or question. The Court may attempt to ascertain the
Defendant’s motives and factually establish the extent of those
effected by this act of intolerance born of racial and national prejudice.
But this court cannot question the tortured death of the nearly 600
named Victims here.

11. End any pretense of the Defendant to sovereign right and national law
as a legal motive and cause to deny a life sustaining medical substance
to a specific class of individual or group. This is without merit or
substance. It can not be tolerated.

12. Prove this inconceivable act was compounded by the fact that the
substance denied was the private property of the Victims listed and the
technology involved the property of the Applicant.

13. Show there exist other elements of state sponsored persecution against
the targeted class, which are not as yet apparent, but were further
instituted by the Bulgarian Ministry of Interior. This is evidenced by
numerous cases of Defendant Bulgaria undertaking an organized
program to identify infected as well as high - risk members of the
targeted class. The isolation, even imprisonment of infected
individuals as well as supporters of the groups in question in order to
insure the systematic elimination from society of the perceived risk
posed to it by the disease and sexual convictions of the targeted group
is overwhelmingly in evidence.

14. Show that the heinous nature of the policy in question exceeds all
proportion or excuse as to mitigating factors when reflecting upon the
facts and circumstances of 145 American citizens knowingly denied by
8
 the Defendant a medical substance owned by them and know to its
officials to be essential to them in the preservation of their well being
and life. In the Defendant having denied their right to their personal
property they denied the Victims their right to life.

15. Prove the Defendant’s policy of discrimination and persecution or in

the alternative indifference or negligence is further evidenced and
manifoldly compounded in its tragedy by the infection of 393 Libyan
children with the HIV virus by Bulgarian representatives. The
circumstances under the instance being aggravated by the Defendants
indifference to the suffering of the Victims and their families. This is
evidenced by the alleged conduct towards citizens of the United States.
The Defendants have demonstrated no remorse or recognition of their
humanitarian responsibility to the suffering they have inflicted upon
these Libyan citizens and as well those Americans listed. The
Defendants undertook no effort to recognize the tragedy and to provide
medical substances and technology to Libyan physicians to relieve the
suffering and prolong the lives of the targeted class. Although well
within the knowledge and resources of the Defendant.

16. To prove the Defendants knowingly contributed to the mental anguish

of the Victims and their loved ones. The Defendant Bulgaria did
knowingly and without remorse cause the physical torture and early
death of these American and Libyan nationals. Malice and
aforethought was clearly evidenced when, despite repeated pleas,
officials refused to provide the substance in question. This is
evidenced by the facts and materials under the case.

17. Demonstrate that no relevance can be attributed to any claim that the
painful and fatal consequences to the Victims are not the responsibility
of the Defendants. That the class of individual or group is constituted
by men, women and children infected by a potentially fatal pathologic
disease is undeniable. Their infection prior to the deed does not
subordinate the criminality of the intent and the fatal consequences of
the act. Their infection as part of the deed is tragedy itself. The fact
HIV was the cause of a tortured death is of no substance to the case.
No more than is a bullet, knife or bludgeon is responsible for the
murder’s act. The HIV infection was simply, in this case, the
tormentor and murders weapon of choice. The Defendants attempted
to eliminate a class against whom they discriminated. This was done
by facilitating, with malice and a forethought, as any murder, their
designated Victims destruction.

18. Prove the criminal responsibility of the Defendants is that they were
conscious of what consequences their action would precipitate and it is
for this reason they proceeded.

9
19. Show the condition cited, HIV seropositivity, together with race,
religion and nationality is in fact the discriminating characteristics by
which the Defendants identified and targeted individuals to be
persecuted. This medical condition, as identified herein, created an
atmosphere of fear, official intolerance and prejudice leading to a
policy of genocide against the HIV infected and high-risk groups.
Long buried official discrimination was a catalyst. The HIV virus
provided the opportunity and mechanism.

20. Establish that the suffering and death of over 100 Americans was
motivated by a life time of anti-American doctrine, which constituted
an integral part of the political philosophy and training by the
Defendants.

21. The Defendants discrimination against Muslims and dark skin is well
documented by international observers and would provide adequate
motive for the intentional or ambivalent negligence of their crime
against Libya.

22. Prove no logic or legal argument by Bulgaria can qualify or condone

that no crime exists since death was predictable and known to be
ultimately imminent. A democratic and moral society must express
equal concern for the well being and interests of that less fortunate
minority which is a part of it. It must be a democratic and moral
society’s responsibility to relieve and not cause suffering. To prolong
not shorten life. The Defendants have not expressed, by the quality of
the undertakings evidenced, a value common with Europe. In fact their
disinterest towards the universal ethic incumbent upon civilized
humanity – the a priori principle to life without torment is evidenced
by the case.

23. Establish that the Defendants formulated a plan to effect acts designed
to control a disease and the number of the target racial or national
group by accelerating or causing the deaths of those members
embodied in the targeted class using the virus that causes AIDS as the
weapon of choice.

24. Establish as a crime the effecting of such a policy beyond the

Defendant’s borders against the citizens of a former enemy and in
another instance a former Ally is without precedent. To bring about
and effect such a policy by denying HIV seropositive individuals
medicine and care, as a group and class, was, until today unrealized as
a methodology. To infect 400 children with the HIV virus is without
equal. What once stood as only a part of the fiction of novels and films
has now become manifest in the suffering of 145 Americans, 393
Libyan children and untold others.

10
The act identified herein is upon the merits and under convention law, a violation of the
human rights of the individual Victims setout as well as every other individuals or groups
effected as embodied in the class targeted for persecution and elimination.

Part III – Convention Grounds

The relevant articles of the convention to be considered are applied as follows:

Parent Convention 1950 – Section I

Article 14 has been violated, in that the conduct alleged to have occurred lead to a further
and premeditated breach of the principles under Article 2 and 3 of the convention. These
violations are a result of a policy of official discrimination enacted or alternatively
tolerated by the Defendant, Bulgaria, and its Ministry of Internal Affairs.

This policy targeted for persecution that class of individual or group whose sexual
identity, race, nationality and more importantly and of greater urgency their HIV
seropositive state. The virus provided the opportunity, method and motive to eliminate a
class of individual or group deemed undesirable by the Defendant. The policy in question
was and continues to be applied with varying degrees of severity depending upon the
race, sex, religion and nationality of the individual or group.

Arab, Asian, Negro, Roma and homosexual males are the most severely persecuted.
Nationality played a role in targeting foreign members of the class of individual or group
identified. This is evidenced in part by the American Victims and recently Libyan
children. The policy in question discriminated against and therefore further targeted
supporters of this class of individual or group.

The Applicant represents a targeted individual qualified by this hypothesis. This is in

evidence by the Applicants illegal arrest, beating and more than 4 years of detention. A
violation of the principles enshrined under Article 5 and 6 of the convention.

The discrimination in question is manifested due to the Defendant believing that the
minority group identified, being HIV seropositive or a member of the groups identified,
posed a threat to the Defendants prevailing social order. To reduce the numbers and
social influence of the targeted individual or group the Defendant facilitated and
promoted, endorsed or in the alternative excused all official acts against members,
suspected members or supporters of the targeted class.

The Defendant Bulgaria knowingly permitted the formulation of fascist cells within its
institutions. Discrimination and persecution were allowed to evolve without the
imposition of the law and ethics incumbent upon the Defendant Bulgaria.

11
Protocol I – 1952

Article 1

Has been violated in fulfillment of the objective setout above. The Defendant Bulgaria’s
police and institutions in order to effect, by as indirect a means as possible, the policy in
question did use the HIV virus to reduce the numbers of homosexual males infected or
highly probable to be infected.

To institute this policy under the instance the Defendant did illegally seize private
inventories of medicine as well as obstruct the manufacture and delivery of life sustaining
substances owned by the targeted class of individual or group as made available by this
Applicant.

This is in part evidenced by the Defendants ordering the end of the production, import
and export of the life sustaining substances. This is materially evidenced by the
Defendant Bulgaria’s order to officials and institutions to terminate all state contracts
associated to this Applicant and other corporate support groups.

This illegal seizure of private possessions is a premeditated objective of this policy. It is

evidenced by the seizure of all documentation, technical and corporate, of the Applicant
as well as his facilities. The Defendants made it impossible to continue with the care of
the targeted class of individuals and the further care of the identified group.

Confiscation by the Defendants of the private possessions of the targeted class, being
medicines and the capacity to finance, manufacture and deliver these medicines was the
essential element in the Defendant’s premeditated plan to use HIV/AIDS to eliminate the
targeted class. The unique and fatal quality of an HIV seropositive state, only required the
Defendant to deny the Victims access to the enjoyment of their possessions or the support
of the Applicant by denying the said Applicant enjoyment of his property and his
freedom. The arrest of the Applicant and the seizure of all corporate assets and
documentation were undertaken solely to deny the right to life of the Victims listed.

Parent Convention 1950 – Section I

Article 3. Has been violated by the Defendant. In that, with malice and forethought, the
Defendants withheld medicine in order to induce death. The act manifested the:

a) Psychological torture was knowingly caused the Victim and by

consequence his or her survivors. The Victims and their loved ones
experienced a psychological as well as physical dependence on the substance
and therapy in question. This was denied them by the Defendant. The mental
state and desired sense of well being and peace of the Victims was knowingly
withheld by the forced termination and seizure of their medicine.
b) Physical consequence of torture manifested itself by more severe and
frequent opportunistic infections. A consequence of denying treatment with
12
 the medicine in question. The nature and character of pain associated to such
secondary infections in the HIV seropositive is well documented. This
tortured state was knowingly induced by the Defendants.

Article 2 para 1. Has been was violated with malice and forethought the Defendants in
refusing the medicine in question did seek to utilize the “HIV” virus to induce the death
of members of the targeted class of individual or group. Agents of the Defendant did thus,
with calculated intent, deny the victims their right to life. While the method is unorthodox
its effectiveness can not be subject to doubt. The malice and intent to deny life are
manifest by the premeditated nature of the act.

Part IV - History and Facts

Six years ago a company, LifeChoice Inc., at 600 Congress Avenue, Suite 1742, Austin,
Texas, U.S.A, and the Applicant’s company LifeChoice International AD formerly at
96A Rakovski St. Sofia, Bulgaria, did together with corporate partners sponsor clinical
trials of a newly patented HIV/AIDS immunotherapeuticum called Factor-R.

I, Michael Kapoustin a Canadian national and US resident, the Applicant, was one of the
six discovers and authors of this new medicine. I am presently imprisoned. My reward in
treating HIV and trying to relieve suffering was to be locked up and even beaten as a
direct result of my efforts to finance and develop this medicine. I was denied my freedom
as a consequence of treating more than 150 HIV/AIDS patients in Austin, Texas, U.S.A.
My hope and personal objective was to possibly treat thousands more in the future. This
undertaking proved to be the grounds for Defendants to justify this Applicant and the
victims mutual destruction.

These patients and I are together victims of a story that is as fantastic as it is true. I
languish in a Bulgarian prison going on 5 years waiting for a final charge and a trial. 145
residents of Texas were, as you shall discover, intentionally tortured, 393 Libyan
children’s lives destroyed. Losing their health and many I am afraid their lives in a
needless pain inflicted by the homophobic and corrupt official policy of discrimination,
negligence and indifference of the Defendant, Bulgaria.

We became each of us, victims of a Bulgarian practice and judicial system operating
outside that international law officially incumbent upon it. Officials bereft of the human
values, compassion and ethical conduct demanded from a democratic society and
member of the Council of Europe did cause illness and death on a grotesque scale.

The Defendant, Bulgaria, a High Contracting Party has added to the suffering of
thousands of men, women and children and has caused or contributed to the death of over
500 identified victims.

Prosecutors and investigators imprisoned me, so they might demand and take from me
the “millions of dollars I had ‘stolen’ to treat this homosexual disease.” They beat me and
13
attempted to extort money from my family and friends in Canada. Their goal was to
enrich themselves and the state budget with millions of dollars that existed only in their
imagination.

Far worse, their actions destroyed the hopes of not only a young developing company but
the health of hundreds of patients who had been beneficially treated for a number of years
with Factor-R, the life sustaining substance in question. Hundreds of thousands more who
might have been treated were not. Shipments of medicine were deliberately withheld not
only from the named victims but also from African and Asian nations in desperate need
to relieve the suffering of infected men, women and children. No mention or offer of this
medicine was made to Libyan families or doctors.

Factor-R, AZT and other medicines had been prepared and purchased by the Applicant’s
company and his partners. The Factor-R had been provided free of cost to HIV/AIDS
sufferers in Austin, Texas for approximately two years. The clinical study was to
continue a few more years. It was to expand to include more patients, a control group and
a synergistic evaluation of the benefits of a combined therapy. Our clinical blood work
demonstrated a correlation of improved immunologic parameters when chemotherapy
(AZT) was applied simultaneously with immunotherapy (Factor-R) and other
compounds.

Our success breed greed instead of pride in the Defendants. It awakened dormant
prejudices and a silent mandate to effect genocide against a certain class of humanity that
the Defendant Bulgaria deemed unworthy of life. In an open display of discrimination,
intolerance and inhumanity these medicines, together with all other company assets were
seized in order to end this treatment. Blood products tainted with HIV was allowed to
infect innocent children. I was hunted, arrested, beaten and still keep in arrest.

The inventory of medicine withheld by the Defendant, Bulgaria, precipitated death and
suffering. This medicine was not the property of the Bulgarian Company targeted or the
Applicant. It was the property of the patients identified as victims here and listed as
participants of a two-year clinical study.

It was the property of LifeChoice Inc., a United States corporation. This medicine is what
145 residents of Austin, Texas, U.S.A. had relied on to make life tolerable. It provided a
relief from physical suffering. A small fragment of hope for a life already tormented by
disease. Factor-R and AZT in 1995 represented a longer less painful life.

Yet when Dr. Bogdan Petrunov, as the supervising clinical trial physician and others,
pleaded to Defendants to allow this medicine to be shipped, they refused. When this
physician and scientist begged the medicine be sent, for humanitarian reason, to the
people it had been helping, he was laughed at. When this internationally recognized
researcher and principle author of Factor-R explained the clinically proven benefits of
Factor-R he was threatened. Not only with losing his position as director of the National
Center for Infectious and Parasitic Diseases in Sofia, Bulgaria, but also with prison.

So, despite the cries of the American patients, the pleas of doctors and the legal right of
the Victims, they were knowingly at worst or negligently at best denied life. The young,
14
healthy children of Libya suffered a torment for which they carried no guilt or
responsibility. Their futures were taken from them. Their once healthy bodies are now
tortured with the ugly marks of diseases they otherwise might never have known. They as
the Americans, will end their lives in a tormented death brought about by the hands of the
Defendants.

Part V - Exhibits

Exhibit A. In support of the Plaintiffs pleadings under Article 1, Protocol I of 1952 of

the Convention the following evidence is submitted:

1. The contract to produce Factor – R 10 pages

This document establishes that a foreign corporation, not the Bulgarian
company under investigation, was the license of this product.

2. Bank transfer documents 6 pages

Evidencing full payment in advance as per contract terms for the 5000 boxes
of the medicine Factor – R. This refutes, in totus, the Defendants claims of
non-payment of invoices as grounds to not release the Victims medicine. In
fact, as is evidenced by the invoices addition funds were advanced for more
product by the Plaintiffs.

3. The list of American Victims who were owners of the medicine in question 9 pages
and due to receive it.

4. The United Securities and Exchange Commission Filing as submitted in 81 pages

1995. This filing clarifies all contractual relationships of the parties and makes
clear the patrimony of the property. This making clear the violation of the
Plaintiffs rights, most particularly the American Victims, under the above
titled convention Article.

The aforesaid exhibits establish the Defendants act of seizing the medicine in question as
illegal. The exhibits evidence that the institutions of the Defendant, Bulgaria had
documented the patrimony of the seized medicines as other than the Applicant and his
Bulgarian company. This evidences that the Defendants did knowingly and with
premeditation effect an illegal seizure with an objective and motive outside of law.

Exhibit B. In support of the Plaintiffs pleadings under Article 2 para 1 and Article 3 of
the Convention of 1950, Section I the following evidence is submitted:

5. The clinical evaluation as presented the National Institute of Health of 107 pages
the United States, Bethsda, Maryland. This report establishes the clinical
benefits in evidence and improvement in patient well being. From
objective blood work and the patients subjective perspective.

15
6. The June 27, 1994 Letter of Victim Asa D. Hewitt providing 2 pages
subjective evidence of patient dependence on the medicine.

7. A July 5th, 1995 request for the medicine seized from Victim Ron 2 pages
Saez as addressed to the Applicant. A further request for the medicine
seized from Victim John F. Goodson dated Sept. 21, 1995 as directed
to the Applicant.

8. A receipt from the Defendants dated March 1st, 1995 wherein the 2 pages
Applicant did provide to the Defendants medicine for the treatment of 35
Bulgarian Victims listed by the Applicant as an unnamed group of
individuals designated for persecution.

The medicine was never provided to the designated Victims.

9. Correspondence with the National Institutes of Health concerning 5 pages

trial results and peer review of same.

10. Patent registration of the medicine in question and details concerning 10 pages
its biological composition, manufacture and therapeutic hypothesis. The
Applicant is evidenced as a co-author.

11. Statements of clinical trial supervising nurse Inge Williams and Dr. 3 pages
Beau Raines showing concern and remorse at Defendants actions. The
evidence further reports the Victims dependence for good health on the
medicine in question. This is further supported by the court testimony
of Dr. Bogdan Petrunov who further cited the refusal of the Defendants
to release the Victims medicine.

The aforesaid evidence establishes beyond reasonable doubt the psychological and
physical benefits as well as dependence upon the medicine seized by the Defendants.
These documents prove that the Defendants were aware prior to their seizure of the
medicine as to its patrimony, unique and exclusive quality and at all times aware of the
dependence of the named American Victims and unnamed Bulgarian Victims upon it.

The exhibits prove the patented quality of the medicine thus making it impossible for the
Victims cited to obtain a similar substance from any other source. This was known to the
Defendants. By seizing the only known quantity of this medicine and preventing its
further production the Defendants did premeditatedly plan the torture and death of the
Victims in the United States, Bulgaria and all HIV seropositive groups in the world.

It is clear the Defendants intent was to torture, psychologically and physically, the
targeted class and to eventually cause their death.

Exhibit C. In support of the Applicant’s representation as a member of the persecuted

class he submits the following:
16
12. The Defendants Interpol warrants for the arrest of the Applicant. 4 pages
Wherein it is stated that the Applicant and others are members of a
pseudo religious organization.

13. The November 28, 1995 Ruling of police Investigator S. Georgiev 2 pages
and Prosecutor Bl. Blajev to intentionally arrest and extradite the
Applicant. This document was issued in violation of Convention Article
5 para 1 abstract (b). The said document was fraudulently issued in
violation of Bulgarian penal procedural Articles 207, 209, 212, 217a and
268 by the issuing police officer Georgiev who had represented himself
to the German states as a presiding judge qualified under European law
to request international arrest and extradition of an accused.

14. The 16 October 1998 diplomatic note of Canada demanding the 1 page
Applicant be tried or released. As of today’s date this Applicant remains
without sentence or right of Defense under Article 6 of the Convention.
The Applicant has been in arrest nearly 5 years without sentence.

15. Translations of newspaper Articles disclosing that the Applicant has 4 pages
been beaten and tortured while under arrest.

16. A prospectus of the Applicant’s company as issued to the Defendants 19 pages

in 1993 wherein the Applicant disclosed the nature of his activities.
Exhibit D. The following defines each group of the class targeted for persecution by the
Defendants.

17. Group I

Being those American citizens, their heirs or successors as named in Exhibit A. No 3

as attached hereto. This group is constituted by those individuals designated as
beneficiaries of the withheld medicine to which they had patrimony and were
physically dependent upon. They are 145 in number.

18. Group II

Being those Bulgarian citizens, their heirs or successors who did participate in and
were designated as beneficiaries of the withheld medicine to which they had been
granted patrimony and from which they were to therapeutic benefits. They are 35 in
number. The Defendants refuse to release their identity to the Applicant.

19. Group III

Being those Libyan citizens, their heirs or successors, who have been designated as
having been infected with HIV, the virus which causes AIDS, by the Defendants,
being 393 in number. The Victims of this group have been denied access by the
Defendants to the medicine and technology in question as referenced in this
Application.
17
20. Group IV

Being all HIV seropositive individuals irrespective of nationality or race who may
have benefited from the medicine and technology of the Applicant but were
intentionally denied that benefit by the Defendants with the motive to cause their
torture and death.

It is apparent from these groups that the class of Victims qualified for inclusion in the
Application and any settlement is of an overwhelming scale. The magnitude of the crime
and the suffering caused by the Defendant, Bulgaria in interfering with the private
property and enterprise of the Plaintiffs demands investigation and clarification.

I respectfully submit this Application in the hope of your commission’s fulfillment of its
legislated responsibility to protect the well being of humanity as well as the rights of
individuals. Those responsible, whatever their personal motives, most be brought before
the court to account for their actions which by their character are crimes against
humanity.

Signed this 13th day of March 2000 at Sofia Central Prison by the Applicant.

Michael Kapoustin
Canadian citizen

18