Validity, Nullity, and Dissolution of Government Asset Monetization Contracts under the Resolution of the Supreme Council of the Heads of the Branches of Government: A Comparative Perspective

Abstract

The resolution adopted on January 11, 2023, by the Supreme Council for Economic Coordination of the Heads of the Branches of Government concerning the monetization of government assets has established a distinctive model of state intervention in the utilization and transfer of public property, situated at the intersection of public and private law. Although contracts concluded pursuant to this resolution are, in terms of their form, subject to the general rules of contract law, they possess distinctive characteristics regarding consent, subject matter, and purpose due to the sovereign nature of government assets. Accordingly, exceeding the limits of legal authority or concluding a contract in contravention of the applicable regulations renders the contract unenforceable, whereas the absence of the essential requirements for the validity of a transaction, incompatibility with mandatory legal rules, or failure to establish that the asset is surplus to governmental needs results in the nullity of the contract. Furthermore, the transferability of government property is exceptional and contingent upon specific statutory authorization; within the government asset monetization framework, the determination of the High Board serves this function. With respect to dissolution, termination based on statutory options or resolutory contractual conditions is generally recognized; however, the exercise of such rights must comply with public order, the stability of economic relations, and the protection of bona fide third parties. A comparative examination of French, German, and English law further demonstrates that the principles of legal competence, public purpose, and the prohibition against acting ultra vires constitute common foundations for determining the validity of such contracts across different legal systems.