John Larkin has insisted that his suggestion of an end to prosecutions does not constitute a formal amnesty and it would aid relatives who wanted to find out the truth:
Sometimes the fact of an amnesty can be that that which was a crime ceases to be a crime. That wouldn't be the position here, it would simply be that no criminal proceedings would be possible with respect to those offences.
He implied that in the absence of legal proceedings, relatives of the dead would have a better chance of discovering what had happened to their loved ones.
"We can't really be surprised if people don't tell us as long as the theoretical threat of prosecution remains," he said.
More top news
An inventor who built a submarine has told police that a missing journalist died onboard in an accident, and that he buried her at sea.
Want to see the moon appear to take a "bite" out of the sun? Here's some tips on how to do it without damaging your eyes.
Rugby star Matt Dawson has revealed how he required heart surgery after developing Lyme disease from a tick bite.