State-owned buildings: the National Assembly wants to shed light on suspicious sales

State-owned real estate is now at the heart of parliamentary oversight. Meeting in plenary session this Thursday, the National Assembly adopted, with 129 votes in favor out of the same number of voters, a proposed resolution establishing a parliamentary commission of inquiry tasked with investigating the conditions of acquisition, management, and sale of several buildings belonging to the State's built heritage.

Led by the PASTEF-Les Patriotes parliamentary group, the initiative aims to examine transactions that the authors of the resolution believe may have been tainted by irregularities. Behind this investigation lies a central question: how could state-owned assets have been sold, transferred, or passed into private hands under conditions that now raise numerous questions?

Public goods at the heart of the questions

The proposed resolution recalls that in May 2024, the Prime Minister issued guidelines, notably to reduce government spending and reclaim state-owned buildings allegedly transferred to private individuals under conditions deemed irregular. This issue is all the more sensitive given that several government departments continue to lease buildings for their needs, despite the state possessing, or having possessed, a substantial real estate portfolio. In this context, the Ministry of Finance and Budget asked the Directorate General of Taxes and State Property to review the acquisitions, leases, and transfers of state-owned buildings. The Director General of SOGEPA also presented, at a government press conference held on March 12, 2026, a summary of the buildings considered to have been irregularly transferred, as well as the steps taken to try to recover them. However, for the initiators of the resolution, this information is insufficient to shed light on all the transactions involved. The parliamentary inquiry will therefore have to try to reconstruct the history of certain assets, from their acquisition to their possible removal from the State's assets.

Acquisitions that raise questions

The commission of inquiry will notably have to examine the conditions under which certain buildings were acquired by the State. Members of Parliament intend to investigate the determination of acquisition prices, the methods used to value the properties, and the involvement of the relevant departments, including the Land Registry and private experts. Another point concerns the flow of information between the various entities responsible for managing public assets. According to questions raised in the resolution, SOGEPA SN, the company responsible for managing the State's built heritage, was not always involved in certain acquisition transactions. This situation could have led to a lack of awareness regarding the existence of certain buildings that had nonetheless become State property.

The sensitive issue of divestments

However, it is the issue of property sales that is the focus of the main questions raised by the members of parliament. The resolution specifically mentions sales of buildings belonging to the state's built heritage that were allegedly carried out without legislative authorization, as well as private sales and auctions conducted under questionable conditions. The document also reports on properties that were allegedly removed from the public patrimony for the benefit of individuals other than the original beneficiaries of certain leases. Other practices that will need to be examined include lease instructions for buildings that were reportedly demolished, and transfers of title to full ownership by private individuals. Some of these transfers were allegedly carried out free of charge or without the required development conditions being met, according to the information contained in the proposed resolution. These various facts will now have to be verified by the committee. The objective will be to distinguish between any established irregularities and mere suspicions, and to determine, where applicable, who is responsible.

Ministers, administrations and beneficiaries in the crosshairs

The commission of inquiry should not be limited to examining administrative documents. It will be able to hear from the main stakeholders involved, at various levels, in the operations in question. The proposal specifically mentions the relevant finance ministers, the heads of the former AGPBE and SOGEPA SN, the directors general of Taxes and State Property, as well as the heads of the State Property, Land Registry, and Urban Planning departments. Members of the State Property Operations Control Commission could also be heard. Individuals or legal entities that benefited from the operations in question could also be heard, as well as anyone likely to provide information useful in establishing the facts.

Eleven MPs to shed light on the matter

The parliamentary inquiry committee will be composed of eleven members of parliament, appointed taking into account the representativeness of the established parliamentary groups as well as independent members. Its mission will be to examine any potential shortcomings and to gather all necessary information on the legal, institutional, and operational conditions under which the acquisitions, leases, and sales were carried out. The parliamentary investigators will notably have to try to answer several questions: who made the decisions, on what legal basis, according to which procedures, at what price, and for whose benefit?

Parliament is tackling a sensitive issue

With the adoption of this resolution in plenary session this Thursday, the National Assembly is embarking on a new phase of oversight of state property management. Beyond simply identifying the properties in question, the members of parliament want to assess the material and financial impact of the transactions carried out and understand the mechanisms that led to the sale or transfer of certain public assets. The stakes are high. For behind each property involved lies the question of protecting national heritage and the proper use of assets belonging to the community.

The commission of inquiry will thus bear the heavy responsibility of uncovering the truth behind these operations, establishing the facts, and, if wrongdoing is confirmed, identifying those responsible. After land and the public maritime domain, it is now the turn of the state's built heritage to come under the parliamentary microscope. And this time, the members of parliament want to know how, why, and for whose benefit certain public buildings have left, or are alleged to have left, the state's assets.