34. 国际人道主义法规定，各国必须尊重和确保尊重“日内瓦四公约”，这意味着它们不得故意协助参与武装冲突的国家或非国家当事方违反国际人道主义法。110 这一义务还意味着，各国负有积极的义务，在其权力范围内尽一切合理努力，制止正在发生的违反国际人道主义法行为，并防止可预见的违反国际人道主义法行为。111 因此，一国应避免以任何可能导致违反国际人道主义法行为的方式协助武装冲突一方，例如向在联合行动中实施任意逮捕的伙伴国提供军事支助，并应采取一切可能的措施，让该方停止实施侵犯人权行为，从而进一步努力确保遵守法律。一国协助冲突一方对被其拘留者实施违反国际人道主义法的行为，即使是在该国境外，也会违反这一义务。11235. 此外，习惯国际法的一般规则是，一国在知情的情况下援助和协助另一国实施国际不法行为，而该行为若由协助国本国实施会构成国际不法行为，则该国负有国际责任。113 在评估一国是否因协助另一国对被拘留在协助国境外的人实施侵犯行为而承担责任时，可能相关的一些因素有：援助(可以包括提供情报、设备、资金或技术支持)对侵犯行为的重要性；被违反的国际义务对援助国的可施用性；援助国对所援助的侵犯行为的了解情况，但该国至少要知道所提供的支持将为实施侵犯行为提供便利。不过，有人提出，最后一个因素的相关性可能取决于所援助的侵犯行为的严重程度：侵犯行为越严重，所需的适当知情门槛就107 CCPR/C/AUS/CO/6，第 35 段。108 Miles Jackson 著，“Freeing Soering: the ECHR, State complicity in torture and jurisdiction”,《欧洲国际法学报》，第 27 卷，第 3 期(2016 年 8 月)；Magdalena Pacholska 著，Complicity andthe Law of International Organizations (Edward Elgar, 2020)，第 251 页。109 人权事务委员会，第 36 号一般性意见，第 22 和第 63 段。110 红十字国际委员会，《日内瓦第一公约》评注，第 154 和第 158 段；《尼加拉瓜境内和针对尼加拉瓜的军事和准军事活动》(《尼加拉瓜诉美利坚合众国》)，案情实质，判决书，《1986 年国际法院案例汇编》，第 220 段。
34. The obligation that international humanitarian law imposes on States to respect and ensure respect for the Geneva Conventions implies that they may not knowingly assist in violations of international humanitarian law by a State or non-State party to an armed conflict. 110 This obligation further imposes a positive duty on States to do everything reasonably in their power to stop ongoing international humanitarian law violations and to 100 Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 35, para. 8. 101 Ibid., para. 63; and general comment No. 36, para. 63. 102 Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2007, paras. 391–393. 103 Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 31, para. 10. 104 Ibid., general comment No. 36, para. 63; European Court of Human Rights, Al-Skeini and others v. United Kingdom (application No. 55721/07), 7 July 2011, para. 142. 105 Responsibility of States, art. 8. 106 Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, para. 400. 107 CCPR/C/AUS/CO/6, para. 35. 108 Miles Jackson, “Freeing Soering: the ECHR, State complicity in torture and jurisdiction”, European Journal of International Law, vol. 27, No. 3 (August 2016); Magdalena Pacholska, Complicity and the Law of International Organizations (Edward Elgar, 2020), p. 251. 109 Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 36, paras. 22 and 63. 110 ICRC, Commentary on the First Geneva Convention, paras. 154 and 158; Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Merits, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1986, para. 220. prevent those that are foreseeable.111 A State should therefore refrain from assisting a party to an armed conflict in any way that might contribute to an international humanitarian law violation, for instance by providing military support to a partner State performing arbitrary