MICHAEL KAPOUSTIN DEFEATED JUSTICE

"For more than a year the pharaoh successfully has been making use of the law in
his favour and delaying the trial about the millions from LifeChoice. Will he succeed
henceforth?

Yana Stefanova

The trial against the Canadian citizen Michael Kapoustin started in the Bulgarian court on
16 April 1999. About an year and a half later there is no decision, the hearings are being
traditionally delayed due to procedural or other obstacles and the pharaoh in practice
showed he is stronger than justice. Because Kapoustin, not understanding and not
speaking Bulgarian, according to his own statements, copes well with Bulgarian laws and
succeeds in making use of them in his favour. And besides this he never fails to make use
of traditional international commitments of our country in the field of human rights as
well as of most recent novelties - a result from another trial in another country against six
Bulgarian citizens.

So far Kapoustin could not only obtain alteration of his arrest with a lighter presence
securing measure but nevertheless he complained in Strasbourg for the prolonged
detention. And so on until … Indistinctly until when.

The pharaoh faced the court under an accusation for embezzlement in his official
capacity. Being a manager, member of the Board of Directors of "LifeChoice" and owner
of 75% of the company's capital, since April 1994 until August 1995 he embezzled
509,302,760 BGL, asserts prosecution. 250 mill have been transferred abroad, 259 mill
remained in the country. 4,731 investors have been defrauded. The punishment in such
cases is imprisonment from 10 to 30 years.

The case against Kapoustin consists of 80,000 pages, the investigative bodies acquainted
him with the evidence collected for 20 days, more than 830 pages have been translated
for him into English. During the hearings a translator is always present in the courtroom,
you can catch sight of diplomats as well who come to make sure on the spot whether our
justice observes the rights of the foreigner. They (the diplomats), by the way, lost
somewhat their interest and rarely appear in the Courts of Justice to keep an eye on the
pharaoh. He successfully takes care of himself and when needed seeks Canadian
representatives to help him in looking for the subsequent defence counsel.

So far Kapoustin changed three of them - the ones who started the trial - Ina Lulcheva
and Plamen Yalnazov parted with Michael after the first phase when things were going on
up to the point (in the essence - M.) - witnesses were being questioned, activities were
being clarified, amounts and assets, intents and promises were being specified. At the
start of the case on 16 April 1999 the first two lawyers asked not to proceed with it
because of the unclarified accusation - the prosecutor Mario Stoyanov asserts that the
main crime "embezzlement" was facilitated by another offence - fraud, but the court
rejected the request accepting Prosecutor Stoyanov's opinion that provided the accusation

1
is absurd, Kapoustin would be found not guilty. And this question was never posed again.
Nevertheless during interrogations of stung (meaning injured) investors of LifeChoice
Lulcheva and Yalnazov clarified how they never thought about the fact that LifeChoice is
not a bank and the money given by them are not deposits, despite the promises for high
interests. And brought things to the thesis that in fact the issue concerns investments and
with such activities there is always certain risk and one cannot be accused of fraud and
embezzlement if the activities contemplated by him and financed by others do not prove
to be profitable. The triple judicial- accounting expertise ordered by the court established
as well that Kapoustin's company has in fact paid dividends amounting to 254,435 USD;
27,153 DEM; 3,200 SF and 52,914,500 BGL. What is more, the experts explained that
they did the accounting only according to the documents available and did not take into
account the oral declarations of the investors. They also admitted that the Law on
Accountancy does not even allow to calculate sums only as per the depositary receipts
distributed by Kapoustin, therefore their conclusions were relative. Lulcheva and
Yalnazov insisted on a new expertise concerning the dividends paid by the date of their
payment or due date as well as for evaluation of the movable and immovable property of
LifeChoice, which was not made. They asserted that if it (the property, assets - M.) would
be sold out or at least preserved, Michael Kapoustin would repay his investors.

They stopped up to here. At the end of 1999 during the subsequent hearing under the case
it became known that the pharaoh parted with both of them (about the concrete reasons
both parties keep silence, there were rumours about letters of thanks from the pharaoh to
Lulcheva and Yalnasov, in which he advised them he refused to avail himself further of
their services). Their place was taken by Anatol - Vessel Lukanov and it started.

At the beginning the new lawyer asked for chasing away media from the hall because
they reflected wrongly the proceedings and incited intolerance towards his client and
accused the prosecution that it did not defend the interests of 4,731 investors. Lukanov
insisted also Kapoustin to be released against "signature" and his case be ceased due to
serious procedural violations. I.e. his client had been searched throughout the world
unlawfully because no summons had been sent to him and Kapoustin never absconded.
The investigation was also unlawful, there were no rulings for assigning to interrogate
witnesses, etc., all in this sense. The said pleadings lasted about two hours and at the end
attorney Lukanov pulled out Instructions of the Council of Ministers of the European
Union for alternative presence securing measures and urged the court to release
Kapoustin in view of our admission to Europe.

Since these arguments did not work and were rejected by the three-member panel, the
next day a new allegation appeared - that masked persons had beaten black and blue
Kapoustin in the arrest, the magistrates had refused him issuing a medical certificate for
the violence used as well as an expertise requested by the British Embassy.
Conversations between the pharaoh and the British Ambassador at that time Paul Macey
(I don't know how to spell this name - M.), amounts under the accusations had been
wrongly calculated.

2
At that hearing the prosecutor had to explain that upon his order the prisoner was under
constant doctors' control and to remind that after the numerous meetings with foreign
diplomats and representatives no one had advised of coercion exercised upon Kapoustin.
After that the magistrates were reproached for breach of law since they did not wear the
provided for by law togas, they had to hear a lecture about the effect of implantation of
microchips as secure guarantee against any escape and had to refuse a chip to Kapoustin.

At that time in Internet came up a message about inhuman treatment of foreigners in

Bulgarian prisons - beatings, violence and threats that they would be injected the AIDS
virus (it says AIDS and not HIV virus - M.). The electronic news was spread out by Bob
Kap - Michael's father Bozhidar Kapoustin is known under this name. The moment was
chosen very well - there was a hearing pending against the six Bulgarian medics in Libya,
accused for premeditated infection of 393 Libyan children with the fatal disease. And
Kapoustin clearly showed nothing would stop him to protect his interests. No matter how
ugly such approach is, the pharaoh may not be blamed for this for it is his right to defend
himself by all possible means. But it is the right moment for the court to interfere and not
to allow transformation of a trial into circus as well as to stop its endless delaying
upon seemingly legal grounds. And if the adjournment due to a proposal for
reconciliation offered by the Defendant (Michael did not omit this opportunity offered by
the renewed Code of Criminal Procedure either, he negotiated to reimburse 5 mill in
green (meaning in USD - M.) against a lighter verdict, but later he backed out of the
bargain) was inevitable and with merit for the protection of interests of all the parties,
with the latest adjournments of the trial things are different.

Since May Kapoustin has again a new lawyer but Fanny Arunova who took upon herself
the task fell ill, for which she submitted respective medical certificates and the pharaoh
explicitly declared his will that she is the one to defend him. This brought to several
subsequent adjournments of the case including the last one. As the court explained, the
alternative would lead to infringing of the obligatory, according to law, right of defence.

It is so - the Code of Criminal Procedure explicitly sets out when defence is obligatory
and Kapoustin falls within two of the hypotheses: the offence is punishable by
imprisonment of more than 10 years and the accused does not know Bulgarian language.
And to change one defence counsel by another may be effected only by request or with
the approval of the accused.

But there is a Constitution as well and its regulations are with direct affect. The supreme
law incumbent upon foreigners in Bulgaria as well proclaims equality before law and
forbids any privileges for any reasons at all as well as abuse of rights or availing of them
(the rights -M.) by injuring the interests of others.

In "Kapoustin" case the abuse is present. And although the Court probably is afraid to
take more drastic measures because of his citizenship and eventual accusations that it
does not honour human rights, in this instance they (the measures) will be absolutely
grounded. Because except for protecting the rights of 4,731 investors by making way for
lodging of civil complaints for the money they were cheated out of, this will also be an

3
indicator of the dignity of the state. Michael will not be left without defence - if
Arunova's illness continues he may obtain an official defence counsel (appointed by the
state - M.) in order to end the trial and justice to be administered. Which will be in the
interests of the pharaoh himself who stays in prison.

Otherwise Kapoustin may tantalize us till kingdom come - the last thing he asked for was
a Canadian lawyer, entered in the German list as well in view of the legislation alterations
due to our case in Libya. If the court agrees to this request too, because of his rights we
will have to offer to Germans and Canadians bilateral treaties with "Lawyers" clauses or
will negotiate with their justice for defence "reciprocity".

And in the meantime new appeals will follow for prolonged detention and violated rights.
Until when?