The opinion of the "English lawyer" is only legal argument made on a view of English law and not at all helpful. The commentary you posted confirms that the decision must only be made by a "competent tribunal" not necessarily (but not excluding) a "military tribunal". This would not seem to rule out a panel of officers of the "Detaining Power".
Another issue arises out of identification of the captives. It has been reported that many of the captives do not give their correct names making identification difficult. It seems to me that prisoners who won't identify themselves or won't cooperate in establishing their identity would not qualify for POW status.
From the Geneva Conventions (Conv. III, Art. 17):
Each Party to a conflict is required to furnish the persons under its jurisdiction who are liable to become prisoners of war, with an identity card showing the owner's surname, first names, rank, army, regimental, personal or serial number or equivalent information, and date of birth. The identity card may, furthermore, bear the signature or the fingerprints, or both, of the owner, and may bear, as well, any other information the Party to the conflict may wish to add concerning persons belonging to its armed forces. As far as possible the card shall measure 6.5 x 10 cm. and shall be issued in duplicate. The identity card shall be shown by the prisoner of war upon demand, but may in no case be taken away from him. |
