Le cyberespace a radicalement changé la donne sur le plan de la sécurité internationale, modifiant la représentation que nous pouvions avoir de la guerre. Nous assistons aujourd’hui à une nouvelle forme de conflit où l’information constitue à la fois un support d’action, mais également un actif sensible qu’il convient de maitriser. L’encadrement des comportements dans le cyberespace est donc devenu de facto un impératif pour maintenir sa stabilité. C’est ainsi que de nombreuses initiatives ont été amorcées tant par les États (par exemple avec la création du groupe d’experts gouvernementaux en charge des progrès des technologies de l’information et des communications dans un contexte de sécurité internationale), que par les acteurs privés (normes alternatives en tout genre). Cependant, leur convergence n’est que partielle leurs positionnements géopolitiques et stratégiques divergents considérablement. Alors que les États veulent préserver leur marge de manœuvre dans le cyberespace, les acteurs privés souhaiteraient quant à eux assurer la continuité et le développement de leurs activités par la création d’un cadre juridique contraignant les comportements étatiques. Notre travail de recherche vise ainsi à trouver une solution au clivage entre ces différents acteurs. Selon nous, peu importe les perceptions et les désirs de chacun ; si un encadrement juridique du cyberespace doit voir le jour en droit international, celui-ci ne pourra aboutir sans le concours des États et des acteurs privés qui doivent donc collaborer. Cependant, il est essentiel de ne pas s’abandonner dans une quête de l’idéal, et ce en adoptant une démarche pragmatique ancrée dans la réalité. La régulation du cyberespace étant multiple en ce sens où chaque acteur est la source d’un flux normatif précis (réglementation étatique et régulation technique), il convient de trouver le moyen de faire coïncider leurs approches, tout en conservant la place de chacun dans l’ordre international pour éviter tensions et conflits. Dans notre travail de recherche, nous avons fait le choix de présenter notre argumentation en quatre temps. Il s’agit tout d’abord de rappeler les spécificités du cyberespace faisant de lui un lieu de conflits à part entière (Chapitre 1). Dans un second temps, nous expliquerons cette volonté des États de vouloir rendre à tout prix applicable aux cyber-attaques, un droit international pourtant inadapté aux défis techniques posés par ces nouvelles armes (Chapitre 2). Les acteurs privés étant les grands experts du réseau, nous étudierons dans un troisième temps les initiatives normatives qu’ils ont su mettre en place, celles-ci venant d’ailleurs concurrencer le travail de réflexion mené par les États (Chapitre 3). Finalement, nous arriverons à la conclusion que la cyberpaix ne sera réellement possible que si trois éléments sont réunis : la corégulation, l’internormativité et la confiance entre les États et les acteurs privés (Chapitre 4). / Cyberspace has radically changed international security, altering our understanding of warfare. Today, we are witnessing a new form of conflict in which information is both a medium for action and a sensitive asset that must be controlled. In order to maintain the stability of cyberspace, it has de facto become imperative to regulate actions in cyberspace. For this reason, many initiatives have been started by States (for example, the Group of Governmental Experts in the Field of Information and Telecommunications in the Context of International Security) and by private actors (various alternative norms). However, their convergence is only partial, as their geopolitical and strategic positions diverge considerably. While States want to preserve their room for maneuver in cyberspace, private actors would like to ensure the continuity and development of their activities by creating a legal framework which constrains the behavior of States. This research project seeks to find a solution to the divide between these different actors. From our point of view, regardless of one's perceptions and desires, a legal framework for cyberspace in international law will see the light of day only if States and private actors cooperate. However, it is essential that we do not abandon ourselves to a quest for the ideal and adopt a pragmatic approach that is rooted in reality. Because the regulation of cyberspace is animated by multiple sources of norms stemming from different actors (state regulation and technical rules), it is necessary to find a way to make their approaches coincide, while preserving everyone's place in the international order to avoid tensions and conflicts. In our research, we have chosen to present our argument in four chapters. We first recount the features of cyberspace that make it a place of conflict in its own right (Chapter 1). Second, we explain the desire of States to apply international law to cyber-attacks, although it is ill-suited to the technical challenges posed by these new weapons (Chapter 2). Third, given that private actors are the major experts of the network, we will examine the normative initiatives that they put in place and that compete with the work carried out by States (Chapter 3). Finally, we will come to the conclusion that cyberpeace will be possible only if three elements are brought together: coregulation, internormativity, and trust between States and private actors (Chapter 4).

A presente dissertação é sobre a atuação do Estado na economia como acionista minoritário, focando, em especial, no caso do Brasil. Em um primeiro momento, tratamos das possibilidades do uso das participações minoritárias, apontando que, embora estejamos falando de propriedade pública sobre parcelas do capital social de empresas privadas, essas participações não configuram, somente, forma de exploração direta da atividade econômica, devendo ser compreendidas como uma técnica jurídica ou uma ferramenta da qual o Estado pode se valer para realizar as diferentes modalidades de atuação na economia. Nesse sentido, mostramos como as participações minoritárias possibilitam a atuação do Estado como empresário, regulador, fomentador e investidor. Em seguida, falamos dos mecanismos societários que a Administração Pública pode utilizar para que, mesmo como acionista minoritária, possa influenciar a direção das empresas público-privadas, tais como os acordos de acionistas e as golden-shares. Após cuidarmos da natureza jurídica e das vantagens comparativas da atuação estatal na economia por meio de participações minoritárias, passamos a analisar os limites dessa atuação. Desse modo, deve-se distinguir entre o uso das participações públicas como opção legítima de atuação na economia versus sua aplicação como burla ao regime jurídico aplicável às empresas estatais mediante o controle societário disfarçado e a simulação de contratações administrativas. Por fim, tratamos da questão da escolha de parceiros privados pela Administração Pública, bem como dos controles públicos que incidem sobre as empresas participadas. / This dissertation is about the state action in the economy as a minority shareholder especially focusing on the Brazilian case. At first, we discuss the possibilities of the use of minority equity stakes pointing out that, although we are talking about public ownership of shares of private companies, this equity participations do not constitute only a means of direct exploration of an economic activity, instead they should be considered as a legal technique or a tool which the state can rely on to accomplish the different modalities of economic action. This way, we show how the minority positions enable the state to act as an entrepreneur, a regulator, a promoter of private action and an investor. Then we talk about the corporate mechanisms that the Public Administration can use to, even as a minority shareholder, influence the direction of public-private companies, such as shareholders agreements and golden-shares. After dealing with the legal nature and the comparative advantages of the state economic action as a minority shareholder, we proceed to examine the limits of such action. Thus, we must distinguish between the use of minority equity as a legitimate option of state action in the economy versus its application as a way to elude the legal framework applicable to the state-owned enterprises by the disguised corporate control of private companies and the simulation of administrative procurement. At last, we deal with the issue of the choice of private partners by the Public Administration, as well as the public controls which apply to the invested companies.

A presente dissertação é sobre a atuação do Estado na economia como acionista minoritário, focando, em especial, no caso do Brasil. Em um primeiro momento, tratamos das possibilidades do uso das participações minoritárias, apontando que, embora estejamos falando de propriedade pública sobre parcelas do capital social de empresas privadas, essas participações não configuram, somente, forma de exploração direta da atividade econômica, devendo ser compreendidas como uma técnica jurídica ou uma ferramenta da qual o Estado pode se valer para realizar as diferentes modalidades de atuação na economia. Nesse sentido, mostramos como as participações minoritárias possibilitam a atuação do Estado como empresário, regulador, fomentador e investidor. Em seguida, falamos dos mecanismos societários que a Administração Pública pode utilizar para que, mesmo como acionista minoritária, possa influenciar a direção das empresas público-privadas, tais como os acordos de acionistas e as golden-shares. Após cuidarmos da natureza jurídica e das vantagens comparativas da atuação estatal na economia por meio de participações minoritárias, passamos a analisar os limites dessa atuação. Desse modo, deve-se distinguir entre o uso das participações públicas como opção legítima de atuação na economia versus sua aplicação como burla ao regime jurídico aplicável às empresas estatais mediante o controle societário disfarçado e a simulação de contratações administrativas. Por fim, tratamos da questão da escolha de parceiros privados pela Administração Pública, bem como dos controles públicos que incidem sobre as empresas participadas. / This dissertation is about the state action in the economy as a minority shareholder especially focusing on the Brazilian case. At first, we discuss the possibilities of the use of minority equity stakes pointing out that, although we are talking about public ownership of shares of private companies, this equity participations do not constitute only a means of direct exploration of an economic activity, instead they should be considered as a legal technique or a tool which the state can rely on to accomplish the different modalities of economic action. This way, we show how the minority positions enable the state to act as an entrepreneur, a regulator, a promoter of private action and an investor. Then we talk about the corporate mechanisms that the Public Administration can use to, even as a minority shareholder, influence the direction of public-private companies, such as shareholders agreements and golden-shares. After dealing with the legal nature and the comparative advantages of the state economic action as a minority shareholder, we proceed to examine the limits of such action. Thus, we must distinguish between the use of minority equity as a legitimate option of state action in the economy versus its application as a way to elude the legal framework applicable to the state-owned enterprises by the disguised corporate control of private companies and the simulation of administrative procurement. At last, we deal with the issue of the choice of private partners by the Public Administration, as well as the public controls which apply to the invested companies.