Skip to main content

Latest Analysis

Independent analysis, commentary and investigations on Africa, the Great Lakes Region and international accountability.

Fw: *DHR* Fw: Rwandan Genocide: The response of Rwanda to the explanations of position by the United States of America and the United Kingdom.


 

REPUBLIC OF RWANDA

 PERMANENT MISSION OF THE REPUBLIC OF RWANDA TO THE UNITED NATIONS NEW YORK

 RPM/873/24.04/C/2020 24 April 2020 

All Permanent Representatives and Permanent Observers to the United Nations New York 

Excellency, I have the honour to share the response of Rwanda to the explanations of position by the United States of America and the United Kingdom on the draft resolution entitled "International Day of Reflection on the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda" (A/74/L.40).
 Please accept, Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration. 

 H.E. Ambassador Valentine Rugwabiza 
 Permanent Representative of the Republic of Rwanda to the United Nations 

CC: H.E. Mr. Tijjani Muhammad-Bande President of the United Nations General Assembly New York 

124 East 39th Street Tel: +1 212-679-9010 Email: ambanewyork@minaffet.gov.rw New York, NY 10016 Fax: +1 917-591-9279 

Rwanda's response to the explanations of position by USA and UK on the draft resolution entitled "International Day of Reflection on the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda" (A/74/L.40) 

The adoption of resolution A/74/273 titled "International Day of Reflection on the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda" (resolution A/74/273), elicited substantive reservations from two member states, the United States and the United Kingdom, in letters dated 20 April 2020. The United States noted concerns on the "changes made to the text starting 2018 and extended today – the narrow focus of the resolution to the Genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda." It was further "concerned that changes to the text – starting in 2018 and extended today – narrow the focus of the resolution to the Genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda and fail to fully capture the magnitude of the violence that was committed against other groups. Many Hutus and others were also killed during the genocide, including those murdered for their opposition to the atrocities that were being committed. Failing to honor and remember these victims presents an incomplete picture of this dark part of history." 

Similarly, the reservations of the United Kingdom read, "We disagree withs the framing of the genocide purely as 'the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi'. As noted in previous resolutions, we believe that Hutus and others who were killed should also be recognised."

 It is interesting to note that while both Explanation of Positions (EOPs) underscored the importance of historical facts and collective memory in averting the recurrence of genocide, they stated the exact opposite by distorting these very historical facts and by ignoring the UN Security Council resolutions and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) jurisprudence to which they are both bound. 

Let us recall that United Nations resolution 96 (I) dated 11 December 1946 recognized genocide as a crime under international law and defined genocide as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group." 

The United Nations recognized that a crime consistent with this definition had taken place in Rwanda in 1994. Consequently, on 8 November 1994 the UNSC (resolution (955)) established the ICTR to prosecute persons responsible for the genocide between1 January 1994 and 31 December 1994. The ICTR began its work in 1995 and formally closed on 20 December 2012 124 East 39th Street Tel: +1 212-679-9010 Email: ambanewyork@minaffet.gov.rw New York, NY 10016 Fax: +1 917-591-9279 having indicted 93 genocide perpetrators; its remaining functions transferred over to the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals on 1 July 2012. On 16 June 2006, the Appeals Chamber of the ICTR in the trial of Prosecutor v. Karemera Ngirumpatse and Nzirorera (ICTR-98-44-AR73 (C)) affirmed that indeed a genocide against the Tutsi had taken place in Rwanda. It instructed that "all the current and pending trials before the Trial Chambers of the ICTR" must refer to the following as facts "beyond any dispute and not requiring any proof;" 
1) The existence of Twa, Tutsi and Hutu as protected groups falling under the Genocide Convention; 
2) The following state of affairs existed in Rwanda between 6 April 1994 to 17 July 1994: there were throughout Rwanda widespread or systematic attacks against a civilian population based on Tutsi ethnic identification. During the attacks, some Rwandan citizens killed or caused serious bodily or mental harm to person[s] perceived to be Tutsi. As a result of the attacks, there were a large number of deaths of persons of Tutsi ethnic identity; 
3) Between 6 April 1994 and 17 July 1994 there was genocide in Rwanda against Tutsi ethnic group. 
According to the ICTR Judicial Notice, the fact that the genocide in Rwanda was against the Tutsi is "beyond any dispute and [does] not require any proof."

 Therefore, the position of the United Kingdom to "disagree with the framing of the genocide purely as the '1994 genocide against the Tutsi'" is a rejection of ICTR Jurisprudence. Similarly, both delegations hold in their EOPs, that the "others" were also killed during the genocide, is not captured by genocide as a legal term. Rwanda would welcome specific reference to "other groups" – outside the group that was the target of extermination – that the United Nations has recognized in commemoration of "past genocides." Otherwise, it would constitute an unwelcome exception for Rwanda. We therefore welcome the call by the USA to "urge fellow member states to insist that histories of past genocides" get treated with consistency in the application of shared principles. 

The demands being made against Rwanda appear to create a mechanism of remembrance outside the principles of the United Nations. However, if the positions of the United States and United Kingdom suggest the renegotiation of the UN Genocide Convention in as far as a collective decision is taken to remember "others" outside of the targeted group for extermination, then indeed this call for the renegotiation of the convention and a suggestion that as it stands the Convention is inadequate and that it should be revised beyond the "narrow" confines of targeted groups.

 In light of the UN Genocide Convention, the expectation that Rwanda broadens its framing beyond the Tutsi as the targeted group for extermination, is to demand that Rwanda applies and violates the Convention at ounce. 124 East 39th Street Tel: +1 212-679-9010 Email: ambanewyork@minaffet.gov.rw New York, NY 10016 Fax: +1 917-591-9279 Similarly, like in the terminology that in fact the genocide was against the Tutsi, the distinction between free speech and hate speech was also settled as part of a judicial process: The Media Trial in The Prosecutor V. Ferdinand Nahimana, Jean Bosco Barayagwiza, Hassan Ngeze (Case No. ICTR-99-51-T), whose aim was to draw the line between free speech and hate speech. Once again, the ICTR jurisprudence has cleared any ambiguity between free speech and hate speech in the context of the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda. It is worth recalling the role that the Radio-Television Libre des Mille Collines (RTLM) played during the execution of the genocide by calling for acceleration of the killings and publications of names and physical addresses of Tutsi individuals and families yet to be exterminated. Despite the active role of the RTLM in the execution of the genocide, when a permanent member was requested to jam the radio's frequency, it refused to extend that assistance to the pursued targets citing free speech.

 In the pursuit of reconciliation, Rwanda has walked the tight rope of applying the Convention of commemorating the group that was targeted for extermination while being as inclusive as possible without compromising the very purpose of genocide commemoration. For instance, every annual commemoration of the genocide, Rwanda devotes 13th April to the remembrance of politicians and others who, although not being part of the targeted group, were killed for opposing the extermination of Tutsis.

 By bringing clarity on the targeted group for extermination, the just adopted Resolution A/74/273 and adoption of decision A/72/L.31 on 26 January 2018, are consistent with the Genocide Convention. Rather than advance reconciliation, the EOPs by the US and the UK bring ambiguity that feeds the resurgent genocide denialist movement that is already on the rise in the Great Lakes region and beyond. 

Rwanda supports the US call for member states to hold those responsible for genocide accountable and takes this opportunity to remind the United Kingdom to arrest and try genocide suspects on its territory who are yet to face justice for their role in the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi, as one of the strong measures to prevent impunity and the recurrence of genocide. 

Finally, with regard to the negotiation process, Rwanda has neither the authority nor the desire to "force" any member into accepting a resolution language. The language in resolution A/74/273 is a result of consultations with all members in open ended format, and in small groups and bilateral format with members having expressed specific concerns.. However, as is always the case for any multilateral process, not every concern raised by individual members without enjoying a broad consensus can be accommodated. 



.

__,_._,___

Comments

Support Our Work Now !

Africa Realities Media is independent. Your support helps us expose injustice, challenge silence and produce evidence-based analysis on Africa and the Great Lakes Region.

Recent Posts

Show more
Africa Realities Media offre un espace aux écrivains, chercheurs, experts, activistes, voix communautaires, militants, analystes et personnes ayant une expérience vécue qui souhaitent contribuer à des contenus réfléchis, responsables et courageux sur les changements nécessaires dans la région des Grands Lacs, ainsi que sur les réalités politiques, économiques, culturelles et sociales africaines souvent ignorées, minimisées ou mal représentées. Nos articles et vidéos visent à ouvrir le débat, renforcer la sensibilisation, encourager la pensée critique et favoriser une réflexion plus profonde sur les réalités vécues par les populations africaines. Nous voulons aider les peuples de la région des Grands Lacs à mieux comprendre leurs droits, notamment leurs droits humains, leur droit au développement, leur droit à la dignité, à la sécurité, au bien-être et à une vie meilleure. À travers nos contenus, nous cherchons également à rappeler aux décideurs, aux institutions publiques, aux acteurs régionaux et internationaux, ainsi qu’aux responsables politiques, leur devoir de transparence, de responsabilité et de redevabilité envers les populations qu’ils prétendent servir. Notre objectif est de contribuer à une culture de vérité, de justice, de participation citoyenne et de protection égale pour tous les peuples africains.

Why We Exist

Many abuses facing African people are committed by African states, ruling elites, armed groups, military forces and security services. But these abuses are often sustained by international silence, Western lobbying, trade interests, migration deals, mineral access, diplomatic partnerships and unequal global accountability. Africa Realities Media exposes that system.

Lived Experience Matters

Survivors, displaced communities, refugees, families affected by repression, journalists, activists, women, young people and diaspora voices are not passive subjects. They are knowledge holders. Their experiences must shape policy, advocacy, journalism and public debate. The people closest to injustice are often closest to the solutions.

Our Principle

Africa Realities Media is rooted in one principle: African lives deserve equal truth, equal justice and equal protection.

Popular Posts

[RwandaLibre] Re: Miss Rwanda 2014

  En l'espace de quelques heures, en moins de 24 heures, je viens de lire 3 postings différents, provenant d'autant de membres différents, qui pointent vers la défaillance du système d'éducation au Rwanda. Certains surnomment ironiquement les diplômes générés par ce système "Merci Kagame"! Rares sont les écoles, fussent-elles du tiers-monde, où les étudiants à la fin de leurs études seraient incapables de fonctionner dans d'autres écoles à l'étranger. Pourtant c'est la triste réalité actuelle au Rwanda. Pour ceux qui connaissent le fonctionnement des Nations-Unies, il est grand temps de dépêcher sur place un rapporteur spécial... L'UNESCO peut-être! Sibomana Jean Bosco. *DHR* BBC: Iyumvire uburyo Kagame na FPR bazambije uburezi mu Rwanda kuburyo ababyeyi bifite bahitamo kohereza abana babo hanze Libellés : Forums Peter Rwagasabo - 29 janv. à rwagasabo, (bcc:Democrac...

The FDLR Myth: How Rwanda Weaponises a Diminished Threat to Justify Occupation

The FDLR Myth: How Rwanda Weaponises a Diminished Threat to Justify Occupation Investigation Exposes Contradictions in Rwanda's Security Narrative For over a decade, Rwanda has justified its military presence in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo by citing threats from the FDLR, a Hutu militia group linked to the 1994 genocide. But an investigation into FDLR's actual capabilities, Rwanda's military operations, and patterns of violence reveals a narrative that does not match reality. The FDLR threat, whilst real, has been systematically exaggerated and manipulated to justify objectives that have nothing to do with the militia group. Introduction The Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR) occupies a central position in Rwanda's justification for military intervention in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. For more than two decades, Rwandan authorities have portrayed the militia group as an existential threat requiring sustaine...

The Aggressor’s Complaint: Why Rwanda’s “Biased” US Sanctions Argument Echoes Russia

Kigali wants Washington to punish Congo too. But a ceasefire that leaves the occupier in place is not peace; it is occupation without noise. African lives are not worth less. African deaths are not normal. Western interests must never become a licence to kill African people. Introduction: A Familiar Complaint On 29 June 2026, Rwanda’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Olivier Nduhungirehe, sat before the cameras of France 24 and declared that his country was “disappointed by the increasingly biased US mediation” in the conflict with the Democratic Republic of Congo. He asked why sanctions had targeted only Rwanda. He called the measures unfair, one-sided and counterproductive. Weeks earlier, President Paul Kagame had told Jeune Afrique that sanctions and threats were insults thrown at Rwanda, and accused Washington of exerting heavy pressure on Rwanda while treating the DRC more delicately. The grievance sounds reasonable until you remember where you have heard it before. Since 2022, the Kr...

THE GENOCIDE AGAINST THE HUTU. PART 2: DOCUMENTED MASS KILLINGS OF HUTU POPULATIONS

MASS KILLINGS OF HUTU BEFORE, DURING, AND AFTER 1994 IN RWANDA, DRC AND UGANDA INTRODUCTION TO PART 2 Part 1 established the assassination of President Habyarimana, the Bruguière and Spanish investigations, Kagame's responsibility for starting the war, the Kigali massacres, challenges to the "genocide against the Tutsi only" narrative, and the need for UN framework revision. Part 2 documents specific mass killings of Hutu populations that have been systematically erased from history: the Kibeho massacre of 1995, the Byumba Stadium massacre of 1994, the hunting and slaughter of Hutu refugees in the Democratic Republic of Congo from 1996 to 1997, killings in Uganda, and the pattern of political assassinations and property seizures. 2. THE KIBEHO MASSACRE (22 APRIL 1995) 2.1 The Camp and Its Population By April 1995, the Kibeho internally displaced persons camp in Gikongoro prefecture southwestern Rwanda held between 80,000 and 100,000...

[RwandaLibre] Itangazo ry'inama yahuje amashyaka i Buruseli kuwa 01/02/2014 -

  http://www.veritasinfo.fr/m/article-122363461.html Itangazo ry'inama yahuje amashyaka i Buruseli kuwa 01/02/2014 Nk'uko byari biteganyijwe, kuri uyu wa gatandatu tariki ya 01/02/2014, i Buruseli mu Bubiligi hateraniye inama y'amashyaka atavuga rumwe n'ubutegetsi bwa Perezida Paul Kagame. Ku mashyaka icumi yari yatumiwe, ayabonetse mu nama ni atandatu (60%), ari yo : 1. Forces Démocratiques Unifiées (FDU-Inkingi) ; 2. Forces Démocratiques de Libération du Rwanda (FDLR) ; 3. Pacte Démocratique du Peuple (PDP-Imanzi) ; 4. Parti pour la Démocratie au Rwanda (PDR-Ihumure) ; 5. Parti Social (PS-Imberakuri) ; 6. Rwandan Dream Initiative (RDI-Rwanda Rwiza). Ihuriro FCLR - Ubumwe naryo ryari rihagarariwe muri iyo nama.   Mu gutangira inama, abayijemo batoye umuyobozi wayo. Bamaze gusuzuma no kwemeza umurongo w'ibyigwa, bemeje ko muri iki gihe, ubufatanye  bw'amashyaka ya opposition ari ngombwa cyane  ...

Desperate Kagame: Where Does He Go From Here—and What Comes Next?

  How Paul Kagame Uses Diplomats' "Bury Your Head in the Sand" Strategy as a Green Light to Continue Rwanda's War in the DRC Africa Realities Media   |   17 July 2026 The purpose of this article is to expose a deliberate and systematic strategy: Paul Kagame's years-long practice of creating events — diplomatic dinners, RPF party meetings, genocide commemorations, international business forums and RPF Bureau Politique addresses — to which he invites foreign ambassadors and the world's business and political elite for one purpose: to explain, justify, and defend Rwanda's military invasion of the Democratic Republic of Congo. Everybody who follows this region knows the strategy now. The same narrative. The same arguments. The same defiance. At one event he tells the Trump Administration to go to hell. At the next he says those sanctioning him will leave power and he will remain. At the RPF Bureau Politique of 17 July 2026, he tells ambassadors that the on...

Kagame désespéré : où va-t-il aller maintenant — et que va-t-il se passer ensuite ?

Comment Paul Kagame utilise la stratégie diplomatique de « l’autruche » comme feu vert pour poursuivre la guerre du Rwanda en RDC Le but de cet article est d’exposer une stratégie délibérée et systématique : la pratique, poursuivie depuis des années par Paul Kagame, consistant à créer des événements — dîners diplomatiques, réunions du parti FPR, commémorations du génocide, forums internationaux d’affaires et interventions devant le Bureau Politique du FPR — auxquels il invite des ambassadeurs étrangers ainsi que l’élite mondiale des affaires et de la politique dans un seul but : expliquer, justifier et défendre l’invasion militaire de la République démocratique du Congo par le Rwanda. Tous ceux qui suivent cette région connaissent désormais cette stratégie. Le même récit. Les mêmes arguments. La même défiance. Lors d’un événement, il dit à l’administration Trump d’aller au diable. Lors du suivant, il affirme que ceux qui le sanctionnent quitteront le pouvoir tandis que lui restera. Lor...

Analyse de l'audition de M Dacian Cioloș, candidat au poste de Secrétaire général de la Francophonie

  Le 30 juin 2026, pour la première fois en cinquante-six ans d'existence de l'Organisation internationale de la Francophonie, les candidats au poste de Secrétaire général ont été auditionnés publiquement devant les ministres des Affaires étrangères des 53 États membres de plein droit, réunis en Conférence ministérielle extraordinaire à Paris. Parmi les quatre prétendants au mandat 2027-2030, qui sera attribué par les chefs d'État au XXe Sommet de la Francophonie à Phnom Penh les 15 et 16 novembre 2026, figure un profil inédit : Dacian Cioloș, ancien Premier ministre de Roumanie, ancien commissaire européen à l'Agriculture et ancien président du groupe Renew au Parlement européen, seul candidat non africain de la course. Cet article, premier d'une série de cinq consacrée aux auditions, analyse la prestation de M. Cioloș sur huit axes : la vision, l'innovation, le développement des communautés locales, la promotion de la langue française, les conflits et la s...

Analyse de l'audition de Mme Coumba Bâ, candidate au poste de Secrétaire général de la Francophonie

La francophonie utile à l'épreuve des projets concrets Conseillère à la présidence mauritanienne, forte d'une longue expérience auprès de cinq chefs d'État successifs de son pays, Coumba Bâ porte la candidature de la Mauritanie au poste de Secrétaire général de la Francophonie, dont le titulaire du mandat 2027-2030 sera désigné par les chefs d'État au XXe Sommet de la Francophonie, prévu à Phnom Penh les 15 et 16 novembre 2026. Son audition publique du 30 juin 2026 à Paris, devant les ministres des Affaires étrangères des 53 États membres de plein droit, reposait sur un positionnement singulier : celui d'un pays carrefour, à la fois africain, arabe et sahélien, présenté comme un pont possible vers les États qui ont quitté l'organisation. Cet article, quatrième d'une série de cinq consacrée aux auditions, analyse sa prestation sur huit axes : la vision, l'innovation, le développement des communautés locales, la promotion de la langue française, les confli...

Analyse de l'audition de Mme Juliana Lumumba, candidate au poste de Secrétaire général de la Francophonie

La refondation proclamée, l'architecture manquante Fille de Patrice Lumumba et ancienne ministre congolaise, Juliana Lumumba porte la candidature de la République démocratique du Congo au poste de Secrétaire général de la Francophonie, dont le titulaire du mandat 2027-2030 sera désigné par les chefs d'État au XXe Sommet de la Francophonie, prévu à Phnom Penh les 15 et 16 novembre 2026. Son audition publique du 30 juin 2026 à Paris, devant les ministres des Affaires étrangères des 53 États membres de plein droit, était particulièrement attendue : sa candidature incarne à la fois le rééquilibrage africain de l'organisation et le face-à-face diplomatique entre Kinshasa et Kigali, dont l'élection est devenue l'un des théâtres. Cet article, deuxième d'une série de cinq consacrée aux auditions, analyse sa prestation sur huit axes : la vision, l'innovation, le développement des communautés locales, la promotion de la langue française, les conflits et la sécurité en...

Why Africa Realities Media Is Different

Africa Realities Media speaks to Africa and to the developed world. Many abuses facing African people are committed by African states and ruling elites, but they are often protected by international silence, lobbying, public relations, trade interests, migration deals and unequal global accountability. While governments pay lobbyists to present a good image abroad, ordinary African people continue to face violence, hunger, disease, poverty, repression and exclusion. We challenge the normalisation of African suffering and demand equal truth, equal justice and equal protection.

Pourquoi Africa Realities Media est différent?

Africa Realities Media s’adresse à l’Afrique et au monde développé. De nombreux abus subis par les peuples africains sont commis par des États africains et des élites dirigeantes, mais ils sont souvent protégés par le silence international, le lobbying, les relations publiques, les intérêts commerciaux, les accords migratoires et une responsabilité mondiale inégale. Tandis que des gouvernements paient des lobbyistes pour présenter une bonne image à l’étranger, des Africains ordinaires continuent de faire face à la violence, à la faim, aux maladies, à la pauvreté, à la répression et à l’exclusion. Nous contestons la normalisation de la souffrance africaine et exigeons une vérité égale, une justice égale et une protection égale.

BBC News

Policy and Systems Change

Our work is designed to trigger debate, discomfort and action. We do not only expose injustice; we work for policy and systems change. We want governments and institutions to address the root causes of inequality, disadvantage, discrimination, exclusion and barriers affecting African people. We believe lasting change must be shaped by people with lived experience.

Exposing Injustice in Africa

Africa Realities Media is an independent African accountability platform based in London. We report, analyse and challenge the systems that shape African suffering, silence African victims and protect abusive power. We are not here to repeat diplomatic language. We are here to ask the questions that are often avoided: why are African deaths treated as normal? Why are African victims given less urgency? Why are governments that imprison, exclude, displace or kill their own people protected when they serve powerful international interests?

Africanews

Africa Realities Media gives space to writers, researchers, experts, activists, community voices, campaigners, analysts and people with lived experience who want to contribute thoughtful, responsible and courageous content about the changes needed in the region, as well as the political, economic, cultural and social African realities that are often ignored, minimised or misrepresented. Our articles and videos aim to encourage debate, raise awareness, stimulate critical thinking and support reflection. We seek to help people in the Great Lakes Region understand their rights to human rights, development and wellbeing, while also encouraging decision-makers to be more transparent, responsive and accountable.

Appel à contributions

Sensibilisez le public aux causes qui vous tiennent à cœur. Prenez part au changement que vous souhaitez voir émerger. Aidez à combattre l’injustice partout où elle se manifeste.

Africa Realities Media accueille des articles originaux, analyses, tribunes, réflexions communautaires et commentaires fondés sur des faits concernant la région des Grands Lacs africains, ainsi que les questions liées à la justice, aux droits humains, à la gouvernance, aux conflits, à la paix, aux réfugiés, aux ressources naturelles et à la responsabilité publique en Afrique.

Nous accueillons également les annonces concernant de nouvelles ou d’anciennes publications liées à nos domaines d’intérêt. Vous pouvez annoncer gratuitement votre publication, notamment un livre, un rapport, une étude, un article académique ou tout autre travail pertinent.

Les articles doivent être rédigés en anglais ou en français et ne doivent pas dépasser 1 500 mots.

Veuillez inclure le nom complet de l’auteur, qui sera publié avec l’article s’il est accepté.

Avant de soumettre votre article, veuillez d’abord lire nos pages du site web afin de vérifier si votre article correspond à nos priorités éditoriales, à nos thèmes et à nos domaines d’intérêt.

Si vous avez un article, un commentaire ou une annonce de publication à partager avec un public plus large, veuillez l’envoyer par email à :

africarealitiesmedia@gmail.com

Nous étudierons la possibilité de publier gratuitement les articles et annonces de publications appropriés s’ils répondent à nos critères éditoriaux, notamment la pertinence, la clarté, l’originalité, l’intérêt public, le respect des communautés concernées et l’utilisation responsable des informations et des preuves.

Les articles sont publiés tels qu’ils sont soumis s’ils répondent à nos critères et à notre politique éditoriale. Nous ne procédons pas à une modification supplémentaire de votre article avant sa publication.