Regardless of whether the Libyan government denies having paid 300 million dollars to restore the former man in charge of Colonel Gaddafi's intelligence services; or whether some sides admit this in the context of the conflicts game, Abdullah al-Sanousi's head is wanted with or without a ransom. Arresting the wanted persons is not a scoop for the Libyan government. Indeed, the American intelligence services have reverted to paying “ransoms" for the head of Saddam Hussein and his most prominent ruling partners. The ransoms paid for the outlaws in return of releasing the foreign hostages usually serve the purpose of keeping them safe. This is not the case for the ransoms that are paid for the wanted men. The value of the wanted person is not what determines the sum to be paid. At the fall of any tyrannical regime, its elements splatter everywhere. The fear from a possible reunion between these remnants is the reason for insisting on hunting down these big heads. There are always some elements that resist change and long for the past. In this case, no sum is too large and no political deal is too exaggerated in order to calm these fears. Until this day, the scenes of chaos and instability in the countries that saw the toppling of the former regimes are said to be caused by the “remnants of the former regime," which have turned into a card used by the rulers in order to defuse any explosion. Through the recent Libyan developments, the new Authority leaned in the direction of hunting down the heads of the former regime regardless of the price. And whenever some big heads fell, the Authority allowed the local judiciary system to try them although they were wanted by the international tribunal. Had the latter tribunal not taken upon itself the task of pursuing these wanted men, then these fugitives would have remained at large, since they lack no financial resources or gangs to smuggle them. Arresting these big heads – that have become rats, as per the statement of the former colonel – does not aim at punishing them, since punishment is often more just at the international tribunals that function according to fair proceedings. Arresting these men rather aims at unlocking the mystery of the secret political boxes that were often operated through oral orders with no documents, no references, and no proofs. In the Libyan case, the domestic situation was the last thing on the colonel's mind except for the issues concerning the liquidation of the opponents, even if he had to pursue them across the world since he was able to mask the involvement of his services in some shady issues with no accountability whatsoever. Perhaps the reason why the Libyan authorities are insisting on trying the “heroes" of the former regime within Libya rather than outside is that there is no telling how these intricate and complicated files might unravel once all the cards are revealed. Not enough time has passed since the fall of the Arab tyrannical regimes in order to re-read the events and reveal the secrets. Saddam Hussein was executed without revealing all his secrets. Zine el Abidine Ben Ali ran away and carried along his secrets. The trial of Hosni Mubarak only uncovered the tip of the iceberg. It seems that Gaddafi's rule will be no exception to the trend of concealing events and preventing the unraveling of the ambiguous areas. Even though the Arab countries have yet to find their way to stability and democracy, the change that occurred in these countries will logically encourage a change in the customs and traditions. The past shall be revisited in order to learn its lessons. The so-called secrets of the states will not remain hidden indefinitely. There are times when the public will have the right to learn these secrets that speak of several issues and crises. The reason for unraveling such secrets consists of preserving the state's stability and institutions. However, this is not the case when a regime is toppled and when the norms and traditions are revoked. Fair trials constitute an opportunity to reveal many outrageous practices. Similarly, the great historical trials cannot be fair unless they lead to revealing all the givens and secrets surrounding the practices, resolutions and deals. Even if the only reason for restoring the head of the Libyan intelligence service, Abdullah al-Sanousi, from Mauritania is to uncover the details of the files in which he got implicated, this is a good enough reason for conducting negotiations to restore him just like restoring a treasure or some precious items. And even if the only reason for launching the trial of Saif al-Islam Gaddafi consists of uncovering the part that he played during the era of his father, this is the least that can be done to reveal the truth. However, the circumstances of this trial indicate that the Libyan state is not yet in full control. This, in addition to the controversy concerning the restoring of Al-Sanousi, does not seem quite encouraging in terms of transforming the trials of the regime's big heads into historical lessons regardless of anyone's fate. What matters is the fate of the secrets, documents and givens that will help in understanding the facts that must not be kept hidden indefinitely.
