La fin de la guerre froide amorça une nouvelle ère de privatisation, de libéralisation et de dérégulation sans précédent. L’internet et les nombreuses autres avancées technologiques ont rapproché les citoyens du monde à un degré impressionnant. Le monde au XXIème siècle semble être plus interdépendant que jamais. De nombreuses problématiques contemporaines dépassent largement les contrôles et les frontières étatiques, des problématiques reliées par exemple aux investissements étrangers directs, aux droits de l’homme, à l’environnement, à la responsabilité sociale des entreprises, etc. La globalisation des marchés marque par ailleurs le recul de l’État face aux acteurs non étatiques. La société civile et les multinationales surgissent dès lors en tant que véritables partenaires dans l’ordre juridique international. Cela est illustré notamment par l’accès accordé aux multinationales/investisseurs à la justice internationale économique. Ces derniers ont la capacité de poursuivre un État qui violerait leurs droits marchands découlant d’un TBI devant une juridiction arbitrale internationale. Qu’en est-il par contre des droits non marchands violés par les investisseurs ? Cette étude explore les motifs militant pour un accès de la société civile à la justice internationale économique. Le but d’un tel accès serait d’opposer les droits non marchands, suscités par des problématiques inhérentes à la globalisation des marchés, à la fois à l’égard des États et à l’égard des multinationales, et auxquelles aucune réponse étatique unilatérale ou interétatique ne peut remédier adéquatement. / The end of the cold war marked an unprecedented new era of privatisation, liberalisation, and deregulation. Internet and the numerous technological advancements have brought citizens of this world closer at an astonishing degree. The world in the XXIst century seems more interdependent than ever before. A number of contemporary problematic issues significantly bypass State controls and borders. They are for instance related to foreign direct investment, human rights, the environment, corporate social responsibility, etc. Globalisation marks the State’s retreat in favour of non-state actors. In this light, civil society and multinationals appear as significant partners in the international legal order. This is in part reflected in the access given to multinationals/investors to international trade law justice. They have the capacity to file claims against states in front of international arbitration jurisdictions for violations of their trade rights as provided under BITs. However, what about the non-trade rights that may have been violated by investors? The present study explores the motives that would justify civil society’s access to international trade law justice. The purpose of such access would be to stand for non-trade rights, raised by problematic issues inherent to globalization, against States and multinationals, and that cannot be remedied solely through unilateral nor interstate efforts.

Pendant longtemps, le droit international des investissements et le droit de l'Union européenne se sont ignorés. Leur rencontre en matière d'investissement a eu lieu dans le cadre des rapports entre les États membres de l'Union européenne, d'une part, et entre les États membres et les États tiers, d'autre part. Cette rencontre a donné lieu à de riches discussions sur l'interaction entre le droit de l'Union européenne et le droit international des investissements. Depuis l'entrée en vigueur du traité de Lisbonne, l'Union européenne dispose d'une compétence exclusive dans le domaine de la politique commerciale commune incluant les investissements directs étrangers en application de l'article 3, paragraphe 1, point e), du TFUE. L'étude analytique des aspects procéduraux de l'Union Européenne dans l'arbitrage international des investissements démontre la transition de son statut bien établi de I'«amicus curiae» vers le statut de « partie défenderesse» dans le contentieux international des investissements. / For a long time, international investment law and EU legislation were developing independently from each other. ln the field of international investment, both met as the EU countries interacted, either with each other or with non-member governments. This led to broad-ranging discussions on how the EU legislation should interact with international investment law. As per the Lisbon Treaty, the European Union is the exclusive authority for the common trade policy, including direct foreign investments under Article 3, subsection le) of the TFEU. The system analysis of the European Union procedural aspects relating to investment international arbitration demonstrates the transition from the well-established "amicus curiae" status to the status of "defendant".

La fin de la guerre froide amorça une nouvelle ère de privatisation, de libéralisation et de dérégulation sans précédent. L’internet et les nombreuses autres avancées technologiques ont rapproché les citoyens du monde à un degré impressionnant. Le monde au XXIème siècle semble être plus interdépendant que jamais. De nombreuses problématiques contemporaines dépassent largement les contrôles et les frontières étatiques, des problématiques reliées par exemple aux investissements étrangers directs, aux droits de l’homme, à l’environnement, à la responsabilité sociale des entreprises, etc. La globalisation des marchés marque par ailleurs le recul de l’État face aux acteurs non étatiques. La société civile et les multinationales surgissent dès lors en tant que véritables partenaires dans l’ordre juridique international. Cela est illustré notamment par l’accès accordé aux multinationales/investisseurs à la justice internationale économique. Ces derniers ont la capacité de poursuivre un État qui violerait leurs droits marchands découlant d’un TBI devant une juridiction arbitrale internationale. Qu’en est-il par contre des droits non marchands violés par les investisseurs ? Cette étude explore les motifs militant pour un accès de la société civile à la justice internationale économique. Le but d’un tel accès serait d’opposer les droits non marchands, suscités par des problématiques inhérentes à la globalisation des marchés, à la fois à l’égard des États et à l’égard des multinationales, et auxquelles aucune réponse étatique unilatérale ou interétatique ne peut remédier adéquatement. / The end of the cold war marked an unprecedented new era of privatisation, liberalisation, and deregulation. Internet and the numerous technological advancements have brought citizens of this world closer at an astonishing degree. The world in the XXIst century seems more interdependent than ever before. A number of contemporary problematic issues significantly bypass State controls and borders. They are for instance related to foreign direct investment, human rights, the environment, corporate social responsibility, etc. Globalisation marks the State’s retreat in favour of non-state actors. In this light, civil society and multinationals appear as significant partners in the international legal order. This is in part reflected in the access given to multinationals/investors to international trade law justice. They have the capacity to file claims against states in front of international arbitration jurisdictions for violations of their trade rights as provided under BITs. However, what about the non-trade rights that may have been violated by investors? The present study explores the motives that would justify civil society’s access to international trade law justice. The purpose of such access would be to stand for non-trade rights, raised by problematic issues inherent to globalization, against States and multinationals, and that cannot be remedied solely through unilateral nor interstate efforts.

Submitted by Ana Côrtes (ana.cortes@gvmail.br) on 2018-05-16T22:26:39Z No. of bitstreams: 1 VC Em busca de diálogo e reconhecimento no STF - Ana de Mello Côrtes.pdf: 1099102 bytes, checksum: 3c71780f7aba8c919be63f10f5520fea (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Pamela Beltran Tonsa (pamela.tonsa@fgv.br) on 2018-05-16T22:33:36Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 VC Em busca de diálogo e reconhecimento no STF - Ana de Mello Côrtes.pdf: 1099102 bytes, checksum: 3c71780f7aba8c919be63f10f5520fea (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Suzane Guimarães (suzane.guimaraes@fgv.br) on 2018-05-17T14:31:14Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 VC Em busca de diálogo e reconhecimento no STF - Ana de Mello Côrtes.pdf: 1099102 bytes, checksum: 3c71780f7aba8c919be63f10f5520fea (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-05-17T14:31:15Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 VC Em busca de diálogo e reconhecimento no STF - Ana de Mello Côrtes.pdf: 1099102 bytes, checksum: 3c71780f7aba8c919be63f10f5520fea (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018-04-20 / Tendo em vista a relevância das questões levadas ao STF relacionadas à alteração do registro civil para pessoas trans (ADI 4.275 e RE 670.244) e ao uso do banheiro de acordo com a identidade de gênero dessas pessoas (845.779) e o papel de democratização usualmente atribuído ao instituto amicus curiae, esta dissertação se propõe a fazer um exame dos agentes que participaram do processo constitucional como amici curiae nesses casos e de sua atuação, a fim de verificar os avanços dessa possibilidade de atuação da perspectiva dos atuantes bem como as limitações e dificuldades enfrentadas. Em uma apresentação dos casos e do contexto, são recuperadas teorias sobre mobilização do direito que embasam o trabalho e é exposto o histórico do movimento trans no Brasil assim como sua relação com o direito até chegar nos casos abordados. Trata-se de casos nos quais todas as tentativas de ingresso como amicus curiae foram feitas por parte de organizações que se colocaram em defesa dos direitos de pessoas trans estudados em um momento em que ainda não haviam sido julgados, mas em que já haviam sido colocados em pauta (de forma que não seriam aceitos novos amici curiae). Com um olhar em geral afastado da corte e do resultado e focado nas organizações de movimentos sociais e sua atuação, como fruto da pesquisa considerando todas as manifestações escritas e orais das entidades nos casos em pauta assim como entrevistas realizadas com a maior parte das organizações atuantes, as unidades de análise apresentam em categorias uma descrição do trabalho das entidades acompanhada da análise dos principais desafios e problemas enfrentados, relacionados especialmente a legitimidade para atuação, requisitos de ingresso exigidos para amici curiae e falta de financiamento para litigância estratégica em defesa de pessoas trans. São destacadas e colocadas em pauta especialmente a seletividade do STF e, buscando superá-la, a interação e as escolhas das entidades atuantes nesses casos específicos, que objetivando conquistas além do resultado no caso concreto se articulam para vencer desafios e superar limitações de acesso e admissibilidade. Levando à conclusão de que embora a participação como amici curiae represente um papel importante na democratização da jurisdição constitucional, há algumas questões, como a exigência de representação por profissional habilitado pela OAB, cuja revisão poderia significar que o papel atribuído de democratização fosse cumprido de forma mais efetiva. / Considering the importance of issues taken to Supreme Federal Court concerning transgender civil registry change and use restrooms according to gender identity and also the democratization role usually assigned to the amicus curiae institute, this dissertation proposes to exam the agents that took part in the constitutional process and their performance aiming to verify the benefits of this possibility of participation in the perspective of the actors as well as limitations and troubles faced. The cases and the context are presented by introducing theories about legal mobilization that base the work and exposing the history of the transgender movement in Brazil and its relation to law getting to the studied cases. In this cases all the entities that tried to engage in the processes were pro transgender rights and they were studied when there wasn’t a decision yet but new amici curiae would no longer be admitted. Looking beyond courts and decisions and focusing more broadly on social movement organizations and their performance, as the product of the research considering all the ways of participation in the processes in addition to interviews with the majority of the organizations, this dissertation presents a description of the organizations’ work and analyses the major challenges faced, especially related to legitimacy, requirements for amicus curiae participation in constitutional process and lack of financing for strategic litigation on transgender rights. Supreme Federal Court’s seletivity and organizations’ interaction and choices aiming to overcome the selectivity are highlighted. The goals of this kind of participation are also related to visibility and dialogue and go beyond the decision so the organizations articulate themselves to prevail over difficulties and limitations of access and admissibility. The dissertation conclusion points out that nevertheless the participation as amicus curiae plays an important role in the democratization of constitutional jurisdiction, there are some issues that could be reconsidered so the goal of democratization would be better accomplished.