Has the former president Ali Abdullah Saleh's file been closed, after signing and approving the deal of guarantees by which the man safely left power?
The Yemeni former president, who is now in the United States for medical treatment and convalescence, says he would return to his country to live the rest of his life, as a citizen.
The deal, by which Ali Abdullah Saleh left and which was guaranteed by the Gulf Cooperative Council states, is a model for way out that can be followed by regimes facing similar conflicts between the ruler's wish and the people's will.
The important question: Is this deal safely irrevocable, in such a way that makes it impossible for any party to go back on some or all of its terms?
History shows that there is no sacred document except for texts stated in divine books. However, political deals can only be deemed eternal or sustainable as long as its signatories respect terms contained in it.
Some say that the idea of avenge or retribution for bloodshed resulted from confrontations between a ruler and people, in any time under his [or her] effective rule, is so sensitive issue that it can never be condoned, tolerated or politically bargained.
Therefore, some believe that the deal of Ali Abdullah Saleh is not a final draft on basis of which the file of bringing the ruler to account can be closed.
Some Arab regimes suffering from internal unrests carefully observe how the Yemeni deal can be applied to reality and can bring about a final reconciliation instrument.
Is the Yemeni arrangement successful and irrevocable? Is it applicable to other cases such as the Syrian one?
Success in the Yemeni case does not qualify it to be a model deal.
The aggravation of tensions and bloodshed in Syria may render any device unsuitable for any safe way out for the Syrian president.
The major bloodshed witnessed in Syria along with widespread destruction and the huge number of detainees, casualties and those who suddenly disappeared, all this makes it difficult or even impossible for the Yemeni deal to meet with success in the Syrian case.
Some think that the "transitional justice", which was adopted by the South African leader Nelson Mandela and his party when he took office, is difficult to gain any acceptance among families of martyrs, injured and detainees who paid the most severe bill in human history.