The scope of judicial proceedings in the explosives shipment case has widened to include 13 people accused of belonging to Hezbollah, raising questions about whether the investigation could reach senior figures within the group and sparking a government dispute over whether to refer the case to the Judicial Council.
The case has become a test of the government’s drive to place all weapons under the control of state institutions. Hezbollah, which the United States designates a terrorist organization, has acknowledged owning the explosives, yet the investigation remains focused on the individuals directly involved in transporting them.
Last month, security forces intercepted a truck at the Dahr al-Baidar checkpoint in eastern Lebanon carrying hundreds of kilograms of explosives, including C4 and TNT, as it was traveling from the Bekaa region toward Beirut.
Judicial authorities on Friday announced charges against 13 people, including two who are in custody, for undermining internal state security, possessing explosives and forming unlawful associations. The charges carry sentences of up to 10 years of hard labor.
Judicial affairs journalist Youssef Diab told MBN that he does not expect the proceedings to reach higher-ranking Hezbollah officials unless new evidence or confessions emerge. He noted that investigators are still examining the phones of the two detainees in search of information that could reveal who ordered the explosives’ transfer.
Hezbollah has also refused to cooperate with judicial authorities or hand over anyone wanted in the case, further complicating the investigation. Authorities have so far detained only the two people caught with the shipment.
Hezbollah lawmaker Hassan Fadlallah acknowledged the group’s ownership of the explosives, saying they were intended for use against Israeli forces in southern Lebanon.
He argued that the explosives’ confiscation violated what he described as the Lebanese people’s right to resist occupation and called for the release of the two men and the shipment’s return.
However, the group’s acknowledgment of ownership does not establish the criminal responsibility of those involved in transporting the shipment, nor does it identify who issued the orders — questions that remain under investigation.
The case has also sparked a dispute within the Lebanese government over whether it should be referred to the Judicial Council, an exceptional judicial body that handles cases affecting state security.
Ministers from the Lebanese Forces party boycotted a Cabinet session in protest over the failure to refer the case to the Judicial Council.
Military courts are handling the case for now. A referral to the Judicial Council would take it out of their hands and put it under a dedicated investigating judge with the authority to question anyone who the investigation suggests may have contributed to the crime, Mohi Al-Din Al-Shaheimi, a professor of law and foreign policy in Paris, told MBN. They could be questioned even if they were not named in the initial charges.
That makes the Cabinet’s decision on a referral, which Lebanese Forces ministers boycotted a session to demand, a key factor in whether the inquiry reaches beyond those who transported the shipment.
