Óscar Ayerve, who previously headed the National Creditors Board of Filanbanco, has publicly criticized former president Jamil Mahuad for his remarks regarding the bank freeze implemented in March 1999. Mahuad claimed that the freezing of funds did not significantly impact the poor, asserting that it only affected the middle and upper classes. In response, Ayerve contends that such comments serve to perpetuate a populist myth that misrepresents the historical events surrounding the financial crisis of that period. He emphasizes that approximately 70% of Ecuador's population did not have bank accounts, refuting Mahuad's assertion that the poor were disproportionately affected.

Ayerve further explained that the decision to impose the banking freeze was made to stabilize the economy and prevent hyperinflation during a time of significant economic turmoil exacerbated by external factors such as the El Niño phenomenon and the dramatic fall in oil prices. He reiterated that these circumstances were beyond the president's control and contributed to a crisis that led to widespread economic disruption. By framing Mahuad's banking freeze as a necessary measure, Ayerve attempts to contextualize the former president's actions rather than dismiss them outright.

This debate over historical interpretation raises critical questions about accountability and the legacy of economic policies implemented during Ecuador's financial crises. As former officials like Ayerve challenge the narratives of past leaders, it underscores a broader discourse around the impacts of economic downturns on different societal classes, an issue that remains relevant as Ecuador continues to navigate its economic challenges today.