2. SAFJP Lic. Francisco Astelarra Superintendent March 2001

3. SAFJP Structure of the Portfolio of the FJP - December 2000 - Information provided by the different member countries

4. SAFJP MEMBER COUNTRIESFJP (million of U$S)% OVER GNP Argentina20.3817.0 Bolivia 8419.8 Chile35.886 47.0 Colombia3.5905.1 Costa Rica 3502.3 El Salvador 3503.4 Mexico17.2163.2 Peru 2.7535.1 Uruguay 8113.9 Value of the FJP and relation with the GNP - through 12-31-2000 - Information provided by the different member countries

5. SAFJP MEMBER COUNTRIES% OVER PUBLIC DEBT Argentina 9.5 Bolivia 53.1 Chile 61.1 Colombia 7.6 El Salvador 16.3 Mexico 11.2 Peru 1.2 Uruguay 11.0 Relation of the FJP and Public Debt - December 2000 - Information provided by the different member countries

6. SAFJP COMPLIANCE TO TRANSPARENCY NORMS IN THE MAIN MARKETS good = 10, bad = 0 Ireland Sweden New Zeland Singapoore Luxemburg Switzerland U. Kingdom Germany U.S.A. Holland Iceland France Belgium Norway Hong Kong Israel Denmark 1. Finland 2. Australia 3. Canada 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 8.56 7.97 7.80 7.47 7.43 7.36 7.16 6.85 6.78 6.76 6.75 6.63 6.36 6.17 6.04 5.95 5.87 5.74 5.73 5.39 5.32 5.30 Source: Mc Kinsey / The World Competitiveness Yearbook 1999 Japan Hungary Chile South Africa Poland Corea Italy Malaysia Brazil Indonesia Colombia China Argentina Mexico Greece India Turkey 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. Spain Austria Portugal 23. 22. 21.

7. SAFJP Emisions of year 2000 and shares that are quoted in stock markets

8. SAFJP Problem Observed in the Legal Frame Public Offer Law Absence of: –Transparency regulations –POL Regulation with legal range –Tipify fraudulent practices

9. SAFJP Problems Observed in the Legal Frame Protection to minority investors –Insufficient requirements of information to control groups –Right to accounting value recess Regulatory and Impositive Arbitrations –Lack of coordination between regulators –Need of neutral impositive treatment

10. SAFJP Incorporation of international standards Chile (sanctioned POS Law) Argentina (project to be presented to Congress) Peru (project underway of being sanctioned) Mexico (Better practice Code in the Mexican Stock Market) Colombia (Value Superintendence Resolution)

11. SAFJP Benefits of adopting better practices Higher transparency and access to the Board of Directors decisions Higher number of counterparts for the operations Better affiliate interests protection mechanisms.

12. SAFJP Brief description of the Argentinean case

13. SAFJP Law of Better Practices for the Societies Governing and Defense of the Minority Shareholder Rights Transparency –Creation of Figure and Regulation of the Financial Services Consumer Rights –Elevates with Rank of Law Transparency Requirements in Public Offer. Penalization by law of the use of priviledged information offense –POS Regulation (inexistent in current law) –Regulates Participation of Locators and Practices of Market Stabilization –Modernizes Legislation in defense of Minority Rights –Creation of the Special Guarantee Fund for entrustees protection

14. SAFJP Law of Better Practices for the Societies Governing and Defense of the Minority Shareholder Rights Government of the Societies -Instaurates a Diferentiated Regime for Open Societies -Make flexible Capital Structure for Stock Companies -Improve Conflict Resolution Mechanisms -Instaurate a minimum of External Directors -Regulation of recess rights (Instaurate equitable price)

15. SAFJP End of the presentation. Thank You.