Eames-Bradley to offer immunity?

Mick has alluded to Eames-Bradley below but the likely outcome of their deliberation seems to be becoming clearer. In the Belfast Telegraph Brian Rowan suggests that there will be a five year period of reinvestigation and following that there would (if the families agree) an “Information Recovery Unit” to which information could be given. This information would be given in private and would not be admissable in court.
As such although Eames-Bradley are stressing that they are not proposing an amnesty, there would be immunity from prosecution and it would seem no further investiagtion of criminal activity. What happens if the families disagree is unclear.
I have previously argued that Eames Bradley was not fit for purpose.

Quite clearly the terrorists are most unlikely to cooperate during the first five years and thereafter even if they do cooperate it appears that they will not even have their admissions and the so called explanations for their actions publically aired.

Again, however, this will, no doubt, be presented as reconcillation and anyone who disagrees with it will be castigated for supposedly wanting to “drag us backwards.” It is of course precisely the sort of approach that the two governments would be comfortable with, allowing as it does a pretence at trying to get justice, then a process which will provide neither justice nor proper answers yet one which can be presented as drawing a line under the deaths of the troubles. Jim Allister has already denounced the idea pointing out that the compliant individuals chosen were always likely to come up with such a response. Danny Kennedy has been no more positive and the UUP intend meeting Eames-Bradley again.

There was previously considerable resistance to an amnesty but Eames Bradley found suitable ways of ignoring that.

I suppose I was wrong: Eames Bradley was actually fit for purpose. In this case they were entirely fit for the government’s purpose: To find a way of pretending to address the issue of the people murdered here but at the same time not upsetting the apple cart, not asking too many embarrassing questions and finding a way of granting an amnesty without being seen to do so. In that the government picked their stooges well and they have played their part admirably. No doubt the final document will have a few tweaks but the chances that it will promote reconcillation must be extremely slim and the idea that it will produce truth or justice is ludicrous.

This author has not written a biography and will not be writing one.