Report on compliance with the principles and recommendations of the Corporate Governance Code

1. The company provides accessible means of communication with the company, such as a hotline, email, or online forum, to enable shareholders to express their opinions and send questions on the agenda in preparation for the general meeting.

These channels of communication were organised by the company and made available to shareholders in preparation for each general meeting held during the reporting period

1. In the reporting period, the notice of the general meeting of shareholders was posted (published) on the company’s website no later than 30 days before the date of the general meeting, unless a longer period is stipulated by law.
2. The notice of the meeting lists the documents required for admission to the venue.
3. Shareholders were provided with access to information on the persons being initiators of the agenda items and nominating the candidates for the board of directors and the auditing commission (if establishment of the same is stipulated by the company’s articles of association)

1. Partial compliance.

In the reporting period, the notice of the General Meeting of Shareholders was posted (published) on the Company's website less than 30 days before the date of the General Meeting of Shareholders, however the rights of the shareholders were not violated.

2. Full compliance.
3. Full compliance.

1. In the reporting period, shareholders were given an opportunity to put questions to members of executive bodies and members of the board of directors during the annual general meeting and in its preparation.
2. The position of the board of directors (including dissenting opinions entered in the minutes) on each item on the agenda of general meetings held in the reporting period was included in the materials for the general meeting of shareholders.
3. The company gave duly authorised shareholders access to the list of persons entitled to participate in the general meeting, as from the date when such list was received by the company, in all instances of general meetings held in the reporting period

1. The company’s articles of association stipulate a deadline for shareholders to submit proposals for inclusion on the agenda of the annual general meeting of shareholders; such deadline should be at least 60 days after the end of the relevant calendar year.
2. In the reporting period, the company did not reject proposals for the agenda or candidates to governing bodies due to misprints or other insignificant flaws in the shareholder’s proposal

1. The company’s articles of association provide for the possibility of completing the electronic form of the ballot on the website (its address is specified in the notice of the general meeting of shareholders)

1. When general meetings of shareholders were held in the reporting period in the form of a meeting (joint presence of shareholders), sufficient time was provided for reports on agenda items and time for discussion of these issues, and shareholders were given the opportunity to express their opinions and ask questions of interest on the agenda.
2. The company invited candidates to the management and control bodies of the company and took all necessary steps to ensure their participation in the general meeting of shareholders, at which their nominations were put to a vote. The nominees to the management and control bodies of the company who were present at the general meeting of shareholders were available to answer questions from shareholders.
3. The sole executive body, the accounting officer, the chairman or other members of the audit committee of the board of directors were available to answer questions from shareholders at the general meetings of shareholders held during the reporting period.
4. In the reporting period, the company used telecommunication means for remote access of shareholders to participate in general meetings, or the board of directors made a reasonable decision that there was no need (possibility) to use such means in the reporting period

1. Full compliance.
2. Partial compliance.
3. The controlling shareholder entitled to nominate candidates to the Company’s governing bodies conducts all necessary interviews with candidates when preparing respective proposals.
4. Partial compliance.
5. Full compliance.

1. The company’s regulation on the dividend policy was approved by the board of directors and disclosed on the company’s website.
2. If the dividend policy of a company submitting the consolidated financial statements uses the company’s reporting figures to determine the dividend amount, then the respective provisions of the dividend policy shall take into account the consolidated financial statements.
3. Justification of the proposed distribution of net profit, including the payment of dividends and the company’s own needs, and assessment of its compliance with the dividend policy adopted by the company, with explanations and economic justification of the need to direct a certain portion of net profit to its own needs in the reporting period were included in the materials for the general meeting of shareholders, the agenda of which includes an item on profit distribution (including the payment (declaration) of dividends)

1. Full compliance.
2. Partial compliance.
3. JSC FPC’s Dividend Policy uses the Company’s reporting figures to determine the dividend amount, and the respective provisions of the Dividend Policy take into account the RAS financial statements.
4. Full compliance.

1. The regulations on company’s dividend policy, in addition to the statutory restrictions, defines the financial/economic circumstances the company should not decide to pay dividends under

1. In the reporting period, the company did not take any actions causing a deterioration in terms of dividend rights of existing shareholders

1. During the reporting period, other methods of obtaining profits (income) by persons controlling the company at the expense of the company, apart from dividends (for example, through transfer pricing, unjustified provision of services to the company by the controlling person at inflated prices, through internal loans to the controlling person and/or its controlled entities that are equivalent to dividends) were not used

1. During the reporting period, the company’s controlling entities did not abuse their rights in relation to the company’s shareholders, there were no conflicts between the company’s controlling entities and the company’s shareholders, and if any such conflicts arose, the board of directors gave them due attention

1. There are no quasi‑treasury shares or they did not participate in voting during the reporting period

1. The technologies used by the company registrar and the terms and conditions of the services provided meet the needs of the company and its shareholders, ensure the recording of rights to shares and the exercise of shareholders' rights in the most effective manner

1. The board of directors has the authority stipulated in the articles of association to appoint and remove members of executive bodies and to set out the terms and conditions of their contracts.
2. During the reporting period, the nominations (appointments, staff) committee reviewed the compliance of the professional qualifications, skills and experience of the members of the executive bodies in respect of the current and expected needs of the company as dictated by the approved strategy of the company.
3. In the reporting period, the board of directors reviewed the report(s) by the sole executive body or members of the collective executive body (if any) on the implementation of the company’s strategy

1. In the reporting period, the board of directors reviewed at its meetings matters related to the progress in the implementation of the strategy and its updates, approval of the company’s financial and business plan (budget), and consideration of the implementation criteria and performance (including interim criteria and performance) of the company’s strategy and business plans

1. The principles of and approaches to the organisation of the risk management and internal control system in the company are determined by the board of directors and stipulated in the company’s internal documents, which determine the risk management and internal control policy.
2. During the reporting period, the board of directors approved (revised) the acceptable level of risk (risk appetite) of the company, or the audit committee and/or risk committee (if any) considered the advisability of submitting the issue of revising the company's risk appetite to the board of directors for consideration

1. The company developed, approved by the board of directors and implemented a policy (policies) on remuneration and reimbursement of expenses (compensation) of members of the board of directors, executive bodies of the company and other key management personnel of the company.
2. In the reporting period, the board of directors reviewed the matters related to the said policy (policies)

1. The board of directors plays a key role in preventing, identifying and settling internal conflicts.
2. The company set up a system for identification of transactions involving a conflict of interest, and a set of measures to resolve such conflicts

1. The company’s internal documents define the persons responsible for implementing the information policy

1. During the reporting period, the board of directors reviewed the results of a self‑assessment and/or an external assessment of the company’s corporate governance practices

1. The company’s annual report for the reporting period includes the information on attendance at board of directors and committee meetings by every member of the board of directors.
2. The annual report contains key results of assessment (self‑assessment) of the board of directors’ performance in the reporting period

1. The company has a transparent procedure in place to ensure that shareholders can send their enquires to and receive feedback from the chairman of the board of directors (and, where applicable, the senior independent director)

1. In the reporting period, the board of directors (or its nomination committee) assessed nominees to the board of directors in terms of having the required experience, knowledge, business reputation, absence of a conflict of interest, etc.

1. Whenever the agenda of a general meeting of shareholders held in the reporting period included the election to the board of directors, the company provided its shareholders with biographical details of all nominees for the board of directors, the results of the assessment of their professional qualifications, skills and experience for the compliance with the current and expected needs of the company (such assessment to be carried out by the board of directors (or its nomination committee)), as well as information on whether the candidate met the criteria of independence as set forth in recommendations 102–107 of the Code and the written consent of the nominees for election to the board of directors

1. During the reporting period, the board of directors analysed its own needs in terms of professional qualifications, experience and skills and identified the competencies required by the board of directors in the short and long term

1. During the reporting period, the board of directors considered whether the number of the board of directors’ members meets the company’s needs and the interests of shareholders

An independent director is a person of sufficient professionalism, experience and self‑reliance to form their own opinion, able to make impartial judgements in good faith independent of the company’s executive bodies, particular groups of shareholders or other stakeholders.

It should be noted that under normal circumstance a nominee (elected director) cannot be considered independent if he/she is related to the company, its substantial shareholder or counterparty, the company’s competitor, or the government

1. In the reporting period, all independent directors met the independence criteria set out in recommendations 102–107 of the Code, or were deemed independent by resolution of the board of directors

1. In the reporting period, the board of directors (or the nomination committee of the board of directors) formed its opinion on the independence of each nominee to the board of directors and presented respective opinions to shareholders.
2. During the reporting period, the board of directors (or the board of directors’ nomination committee) reviewed the independence of the current board of directors’ members at least once (after they were elected).
3. The company developed procedures defining the actions to be taken by a member of the board of directors if they ceases to be independent, including the obligation to timely notify the board of directors thereof

1. Independent directors make up at least one third of the board of directors

1. In the reporting period, independent directors (who did not have a conflict of interest) carried out a preliminary assessment of significant corporate actions implying a possible conflict of interest, and the results of such assessment were presented to the board of directors

1. The board of directors is chaired by an independent director, or a senior independent director is appointed from among the independent directors.
2. The role, rights and duties of the chairman of the board of directors (and, if applicable, of the senior independent director) are duly set out in the company’s internal documents

1. No compliance.

The Chairman of JSC FPC’s Board of Directors is not an independent director. The candidate for the position of Chairman of the Board of Directors of JSC FPC shall be agreed with the Board of Directors of the parent company.

Independent directors do not require additional coordination, and there is no provision for a senior independent director.

2. Full compliance.

1. The efficiency of the chairman of the board of directors was assessed as part of the procedure for assessing (self‑assessing) the performance of the board of directors in the reporting period

1. The company’s internal documents set out the duty of the chairman of the board of directors to take all steps necessary for the timely provision to directors of full and reliable information regarding items on the agenda of the board meeting

1. The company’s internal documents provide that a director should notify the board of directors if he/she has a conflict of interest in respect of any item on the agenda of the board meeting or the board’s committee meeting, prior to the discussion of the relevant agenda item.
2. The company’s internal documents stipulate that a director should abstain from voting on any item in connection with which they have a conflict of interest.
3. The company has in place a procedure enabling the board of directors to get professional advice on matters within its remit at the expense of the company

1. The company has adopted and published an internal document clearly defining the rights and duties of directors

1. Individual attendance of the meetings of the board of directors and committees, as well as sufficient time to work on the board of directors, including its committees, is analysed as part of the procedure for assessment (self‑assessment) of the board of directors’ performance in the reporting period.
2. In accordance with the company’s internal documents, directors inform the board of their intentions to joint management bodies of other organisations (except for entities controlled by the company), or of the relevant appointment made

1. In accordance with the company’s internal documents, the members of the board of directors have the right to obtain information and documents necessary for the members of the board of directors to perform their duties relating to the company and its controlled entities, and the executive bodies of the company should ensure that relevant information and documents are provided.
2. The company implements a formalised induction programme for newly elected directors

1. The board of directors held at least six meetings in the reporting year

1. The company has an approved internal document that describes the procedure for arranging and holding meetings of the board of directors and sets out, in particular, that the notice of the meeting shall be given, as a rule, at least five days prior to such meeting.
2. During the reporting period, the members of the board of directors who were not present at the meeting venue were given the opportunity to participate in the discussion of agenda items and vote remotely via conference calls and video conferencing

1. The company’s articles of association or internal documents stipulate that the most important issues (including those listed in recommendation 168 of the Code) should be considered at in‑person meetings of the board of directors

1. The company’s articles of association provide for resolutions on the most important matters (including those set out in recommendation 170 of the Code) to be passed at a meeting of the board of directors by a qualified majority of at least 3/4 or by a majority of all elected directors

In accordance with para. 18.7 of the Articles of Association, resolutions of the Company’s Board of Directors on including the persons nominated by shareholders or the Company’s Board of Directors in the list of members of the collegial executive body or the Company’s Auditing Commission and electing the person acting as the sole executive body of each company created through reorganisation in the form of merger, division or spin‑off, as well as on the issue specified in subpara. 3, para. 15.1, Article 15 the present Articles of Association and in cases stipulated by the Federal Law “On Joint Stock Companies”, are passed by a majority of at least three quarters of the total number of Directors.

The votes of the retired members of the Board of Directors of the Company shall not be taken into account when the Board of Directors of the Company adopts resolutions stipulated by this clause. The criteria for recognising a member of the Board of Directors of the Company as retired shall be determined by the Regulations on the Board of Directors of the Company.

In accordance with para. 18.8 of the Articles of Association, resolutions of the Company’s Board of Directors on matters listed in subpara. 1, 12, 21, 24, 26, 36, 42, 43, 45 of para. 15.1, Article 15 of the present Articles of Association, as well as on approving the Company’s Dividend Policy are passed by a majority of the members of Company’s Board of Directors.

1. The board of directors set up an audit committee comprised solely of independent directors.
2. The company’s internal documents set out the tasks of the audit committee, including those listed in recommendation 172 of the Code.
3. At least one member of the audit committee represented by an independent director has experience and knowledge of preparing, analysing, assessing and auditing accounting (financial) statements.
4. Meetings of the audit committee were held at least once a quarter during the reporting period

1. No compliance.

Before the Annual General Meeting of Shareholders, the Audit and Risk Committee included members of the Board of Directors and experts representing the parent company; after the Annual General Meeting of Shareholders, the Audit and Risk Committee includes one independent director (Chairman), members of the Board of Directors and experts representing the parent company.

2. Full compliance.
3. Partial compliance.

The Audit and Risk Committee, elected after the annual General Meeting of Shareholders, is chaired by an independent member of the Board of Directors.

4. Full compliance.

1. The board of directors set up a remuneration committee comprised solely of independent directors.
2. The remuneration committee is headed by an independent director who is not the chairman of the board of directors.
3. The company’s internal documents determine the tasks of the remuneration committee, including but not limited to the tasks covered by recommendation 180

1. Partial compliance.

The Company established the Human Resources, Remuneration and Corporate Governance Committee consisting of two independent directors, representatives of the shareholder and the Company's management.

2. Full compliance.
3. Partial compliance.

The Regulations on the Human Resources, Remuneration and Corporate Governance Committee do not include the tasks contained in para. 4 of recommendation 180 of the Corporate Governance Code, and also do not envisage the revision of the Company's policy on remuneration of members of the Board of Directors, executive bodies and other key executives.

1. The board of directors has set up a nomination committee (or its tasks listed in recommendation 186 of the Code are fulfilled by another committee) predominantly comprised of independent directors.
2. The company’s internal documents set out the tasks of the nomination committee (or the tasks of the committee with combined functions), including those listed in recommendation 186 of the Code.
3. In the reporting period, in order to form the board of directors that best meets the company’s goals and objectives, the nomination committee organised interaction with shareholders, not limited to the largest shareholders, in the context of selecting candidates to the board of directors of the company, either individually or jointly with other committees of the board of directors or the company’s authorised subdivision in charge of relations with shareholders

1. Partial compliance.

JSC FPC set up the Human Resources, Remuneration and Corporate Governance Committee of the Board of Directors of JSC FPC. The functions of this Committee are enshrined in the Regulations on the Committee for Human Resources, Remuneration and Corporate Governance of the Board of Directors of JSC FPC and comply with the recommendations of the Corporate Governance Code regarding the remuneration committee and the nomination committee.

Two independent directors were elected to the Human Resources, Remuneration and Corporate Governance Committee, one of whom chairs the committee.

2. Full compliance.
3. No compliance.

Given the existing structure of JSC FPC's authorised capital, i.e., the presence of a single shareholder in the share capital structure, this criterion is irrelevant for the Company.

For selection of candidates to the Company's Board of Directors, the Human Resources, Remuneration and Corporate Governance Committee presented the Committee's recommendations to shareholders on the candidates' compliance with the criteria of independence, qualifications, competences and experience.

1. In the reporting period, the company’s board of directors considered whether the structure of the board of directors is appropriate to the scope, nature, business goals, needs, and risk profile of the company. Additional committees were either set up or deemed unnecessary

1. The audit committee, remuneration committee, and nomination committee (or the relevant committee with a combined function) were chaired by independent directors in the reporting period.
2. The company’s internal documents (policies) include provisions stipulating that persons who are not members of the audit committee, the nomination committee (or the relevant committee with a combined function) and the remuneration committee may attend committee meetings only by invitation of the chairman of the respective committee

1. Partial compliance.

During the reporting period, the Human Resources, Remuneration and Corporate Governance Committee was chaired by an independent director.

In the period before the General Meeting of Shareholders, the Audit and Risk Committee was chaired by a non‑executive director; after the General Meeting of Shareholders, the Audit and Risk Committee was chaired an independent director.

2. Full compliance.

1. During the reporting period, committee chairmen reported to the board of directors on the work of committees on a regular basis

1. The company’s internal documents stipulate the procedures for assessing (self‑assessing) the board of directors’ performance.
2. The assessment (self‑assessment) of the board of directors’ performance carried out in the reporting period included an assessment of the work of the committees, an individual assessment of each member of the board of directors and the board of directors as a whole.
3. Results of assessment (self‑assessment) of the board of directors’ performance carried out in the reporting period were reviewed at the in‑person meeting of the board of directors

1. The company engaged an external institution (advisor) to conduct an independent assessment of the board of directors’ performance at least once over the last three reporting periods

1. The company’s website and the annual report contain biographical information on the corporate secretary (including information on age, education, qualifications, experience), as well as information on positions in management bodies of other legal entities held by the corporate secretary for at least the last five years

1. The company has adopted and published an internal document – regulations on the corporate secretary.
2. The board of directors approves the candidate for the position of corporate secretary, terminates their powers and considers the payment of additional remuneration to them.
3. The company’s internal documents stipulate the corporate secretary’s right to request and receive company documents and information from management bodies, subdivisions and officers of the company

1. Full compliance.
2. Partial compliance.
3. Due to approval of the revised Articles of Association, payment of remuneration to the Corporate Secretary is referred to the competence of the General Director.
4. Full compliance.

1. Remuneration of members of the board of directors, executive bodies and other key executives of the company is determined based on the results of a comparative analysis of remuneration levels in comparable companies

1. During the reporting period, the remuneration committee reviewed the remuneration policy (policies) and (or) practices of its (their) implementation, assessed their efficiency and transparency, and, if necessary, submitted respective recommendations to the board of directors for revision of the said policy (policies)

1. The company’s remuneration policy (policies) includes (include) transparent mechanisms for determining the amount of remuneration due to directors, executive bodies and other key managers of the company, and regulates (regulate) all types of expenses, benefits and privileges provided to such persons

The company pays fixed annual remuneration to directors. The company does not pay remuneration for attending selected meetings of the board of directors or its committees.

The company does not apply any form of short‑term motivation or additional financial incentive for directors

1. In the reporting period, the company paid remuneration to the members of the board of directors in accordance with the remuneration policy adopted by the company.
2. In the reporting period, the company did not apply any forms of short‑term motivation or additional material incentives to the members of the board of directors, the payment of which depends on the results (indicators) of the company’s performance. No remuneration was paid for participation in individual meetings of the board of directors or the committees under the board of directors

1. If the company’s internal document(s) – the remuneration policy (policies) – stipulate(s) (stipulate) provision of the company’s shares to directors, clear rules for share ownership by directors shall be defined and disclosed, aimed at stimulating long‑term ownership of such shares

The approach to assessing the criterion was revised.

The Company's internal remuneration document does not provide for the granting of Company shares to members of the Board of Directors.

1. The company does not provide for any extra payments or compensations in the event of early termination of directors’ mandates resulting from the change of control or any other reasons

1. In the reporting period, annual performance indicators approved by the board of directors were used to determine the amount of the variable part of remuneration due to members of executive bodies and other key managers of the company.
2. During the latest assessment of the system of remuneration for members of executive bodies and other key managers of the company, the board of directors (remuneration committee) made sure that the company applies efficient ratio of the fixed and variable parts of remuneration.
3. When determining the amount of remuneration payable to the members of executive bodies and other key executives of the company, consideration is given to the risks borne by the company in order to avoid creating incentives for taking excessively risky management decisions

1. If the company has introduced a long‑term incentive programme for members of executive bodies and other key executives of the company using company shares (financial instruments based on company shares), the programme stipulates that the right to sell such shares and other financial instruments shall not arise earlier than three years after provision of the same. The right to dispose of such shares or other financial instruments is linked to the company’s performance targets

The approach to assessing the criterion was revised.

Not applicable to the Company's operations, as motivation of executive bodies and other key management personnel of the Company is regulated by the Russian Government Order No. 3579‑r dated 28 December 2020 and Russian Government Resolution No. 209 dated 13 February 2023.

For more details, see Key Provisions of the Remuneration and Expense Reimbursement Policy for the Executive Body and Other Key Employees

1. In the reporting period, the compensation (golden parachute) payable by the company in case of early termination of the powers of executive bodies or key managers at the company’s initiative, provided that there have been no actions in bad faith on their part, did not exceed the double amount of the fixed part of their annual remuneration

1. Functions of different management bodies and units of the company in the risk management system and internal control are clearly defined in the company’s internal documents/relevant policy approved by the board of directors

1. The company’s executive bodies ensured the distribution functions, powers and responsibilities related to risk management and internal control between the heads (managers) of units and departments accountable to them

1. The company has the anti‑corruption policy approved.
2. The company has arranged for safe, confidential and accessible means (hotline) of notifying the board of directors or the board’s audit committee about violations of the law, the company’s internal procedures and code of ethics

1. During the reporting period, the board of directors (audit committee and/or risk committee) (if any) organised an assessment of the reliability and effectiveness of the risk management and internal control systems.
2. During the reporting period, the board of directors reviewed the results of the assessment of the reliability and efficiency of the company’s risk management and internal control systems; information on the results of the review is included in the company’s annual report

1. To perform internal audits, the company has set up a separate internal audit business unit functionally reporting to the board of directors, or an independent external organisation with the same line of reporting is engaged

1. During the reporting period, internal audit assessed the reliability and effectiveness of the risk management and internal control system.
2. During the reporting period, internal audits assessed corporate governance practices (individual practices), including information exchange procedures (including on internal control and risk management) at all levels of the company's management, as well as interaction with stakeholders

1. The company discloses information on its corporate governance system and general principles of corporate governance applied in the company, including disclosure on a website.
2. The company discloses information on the composition of executive bodies and the board of directors, independence of the board members and their membership in the board’s committees (as defined in the Code).
3. If the company has a controlling entity, the company publishes a memorandum of the controlling entity setting out the latter’s plans for the company’s corporate governance

1. Full compliance.
2. Partial compliance: information on the sole executive body – General Director is disclosed, Section 4.4 of the Report provides qualitative characteristics of the Board of Directors without disclosure of personal data.
3. No compliance.

A memorandum is not available.

1. The company established a procedure that ensures coordination of work of all subdivisions and employees of the company who are related to disclosure of information or whose activities may result in the need to disclose information.
2. If the company’s securities are traded on foreign regulated markets, the company ensures concerted and equivalent disclosure of material information in the Russian Federation and in the said markets in the reporting period.
3. If foreign shareholders hold a significant amount of the company’s shares, during the reporting year, information was disclosed not only in the Russian language, but also in one of the most widespread foreign languages

1. Full compliance.
2. The Company's securities are not traded on foreign organised exchanges.
3. JSC FPC has no foreign shareholders.

1. The company’s information policy defines approaches to disclosure of information on other events (actions) which have a significant effect on the value or quotation of its securities, while disclosure of which is not required by law.
2. The company discloses complete information on its capital structure, as stated in recommendation 290 of the Code, in its annual report and on the corporate website.
3. The company discloses information on controlled entities that are significant to the company, including key areas of their activities, mechanisms for ensuring accountability of controlled entities, the authority of the company’s board of directors to determine strategy and assess performance of controlled entities.
4. The company discloses non‑financial reports – a sustainability report, an environmental report, a corporate social responsibility report or another report containing non‑financial information, including factors related to the environment (inter alia, environmental and climate change related factors), society (social factors) and corporate governance, except for the report of the issuer of equity securities and the annual report of the joint stock company

1. Full compliance.
2. Full compliance.
3. Full compliance.
4. Partial compliance.

The company discloses non‑financial reports — a sustainability report, an environmental report, a corporate social responsibility report or another report containing non‑financial information, including factors related to the environment (including ecological factors and factors related to climate change), society (social factors) and corporate governance only in the Annual Report.

1. The annual report of the company contains information on the results of the assessment by the audit committee of the effectiveness of the external and internal audit process.
2. The company’s annual report contains information on the company’s environmental and social policy

1. Partial compliance.

The Audit and Risk Committee of the Board of Directors annually assesses the quality of internal audits conducted by JSC FPC's Internal Audit Department.

2. Full compliance.

1. The company’s information policy (internal documents defining the information policy) defines a convenient procedure for providing access to the company’s information and documents, upon shareholders’ requests.
2. The information policy (internal documents defining the information policy) contains provisions stipulating that if a shareholder requests information on organisations controlled by the company, the company shall make the necessary efforts to obtain such information from the relevant organisations controlled by the company.

1. In the reporting period, the company did not refuse shareholders’ requests for information, or such refusals were justified.
2. In cases defined by the information policy, shareholders are warned of the confidential nature of the information and undertake to maintain its confidentiality.

1. The company’s articles of association define a list (criteria) of transactions or other actions that constitute significant corporate actions. Resolutions on significant corporate actions are referred to the jurisdiction of the board of directors, according to the company’s articles of association. When execution of such corporate actions is expressly referred by law to the jurisdiction of the general shareholders meeting, the board of directors presents relevant recommendations to shareholders

The Company’s Articles of Association define a list (criteria) of transactions or other actions that constitute significant corporate actions.

In accordance with the current Articles of Association of JSC FPC, decisions to take significant corporate actions fall within the competence of the General Meeting of Shareholders and the Board of Directors. Issues referred to the competence of the General Meeting of Shareholders are subject to preliminary consideration by the Board of Directors in order to form an appropriate recommendation. The Board of Directors also determined the criteria of major transactions subject to compliance with which such transactions are subject to approval by the Board of Directors (disposal of immovable property, transactions related to receipt and issue of loans and sureties by the Company, issuance of guarantees by the Company (including on behalf of the Company), conclusion of loan agreements, borrow agreements, pledge agreements, transactions with promissory notes).

1. The company has in place a procedure enabling independent directors to express their opinions on significant corporate actions prior to approval thereof

When taking significant corporate actions affecting the rights and legitimate interests of shareholders, equal terms and conditions are ensured for all shareholders of the company, and, in case of insufficient statutory mechanisms for protecting shareholder rights, additional measures are taken to protect the rights and legitimate interests of the company’s shareholders.

In doing so, the company is guided by the corporate governance principles set forth in the Code, as well as by formal statutory requirements

1. The company’s articles of association, taking into account the peculiarities of the company’s operations, stipulate that the competence of the board of directors shall include approval of other transactions that are significant to the company, in addition to those provided for by law.
2. In the reporting period, all significant corporate actions were duly approved before they were taken.

1. If the company performed significant corporate actions during the reporting period, the company disclosed information on such actions in a timely and detailed manner, including disclosing the reasons, conditions and consequences of such actions to shareholders

1. The company’s internal documents provide for the cases and procedure for engaging an appraiser to determine the value of the property disposed of or acquired pursuant to a major transaction or a related‑party transaction.
2. The company’s internal documents set out the procedure for engaging an appraiser to assess the value of the company’s shares at their repurchase or redemption.
3. If there is no formal interest of a member of the board of directors, the sole executive body, member of the collegial executive body of the company or an entity being a controlling entity of the company or an entity entitled to give instructions binding on the company in transactions of the company, but if there is a conflict of interest or other actual interest, the internal documents of the company provide that such entities shall not participate in voting on approval of such transaction

1. Partial compliance.

The Company's internal documents stipulate the procedure for engaging an independent appraiser to determine the market value of the disposed immovable property.

2. Partial compliance.

When approving major transactions by the General Meeting of Shareholders, JSC FPC is guided by the provisions of the Federal Law “On Joint Stock Companies” and JSC FPC's Articles of Association. Thus, in order to respect the rights of shareholders to buy back shares in major transactions, JSC FPC engages an independent appraiser to assess the market value of the shares to be bought back, and the results of such assessment are reviewed by the Company's Board of Directors.

In internal documents, the Regulations on the General Meeting of Shareholders stipulate the submission of a share appraisal report to shareholders in the event of significant corporate actions.

3. Partial compliance.

Section 3.3 of the Regulations on the Board of Directors of JSC FPC (approved on 3 July 2024, Minutes of the Annual General Meeting of Shareholders No. 58) stipulates that a member of the Board of Directors who has a conflict of interest must immediately notify the Board of Directors, through its Chairman or the Company's Corporate Secretary, of both the existence of a conflict of interest and the grounds for the conflict. Such notification shall in any case be made prior to the discussion of the matter on which such member of the Board of Directors has a conflict of interest at a meeting of the Board of Directors or its committee with the participation of such Board member.

The Board member may not participate in decision‑making if there is a conflict of interest. They should abstain from voting on matters in respect of which they have a conflict of interest.

Where the nature of the matter under discussion or the specifics of a conflict of interest so requires, the Board of Directors shall have the right to propose that the member of the Board of Directors with the relevant conflict of interest not attend the discussion of such matter at the meeting.