Exhibit B

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

10 pages

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