Lebanon has been officially informed by Bulgaria of the decision to release the owner of the ammonium nitrate ship, Igor Grechushkin, in a development that has brought the Beirut Port explosion file back to the forefront of judicial disappointments. Since the case was moved internationally, it has become a storm within the Lebanese judiciary, with no positive concrete steps toward completing the indictment or establishing a comprehensive judicial truth. Rather than Grechushkin’s arrest marking a breakthrough in the investigation, the entire process concluded with formal procedures added to a long record of obstacles and complexities.
In September 2025, Bulgarian authorities arrested Grechushkin based on an absentee arrest warrant issued by the Lebanese judiciary, which at the time was seen as a rare opportunity to reconnect the international dimension of the case. However, the process quickly became complicated, as Bulgaria refused to hand him over to Lebanon, citing concerns that he might face the death penalty. Despite the Lebanese state providing clear written assurances that no such penalty would be applied, the extradition decision remained pending, with Bulgaria ultimately agreeing to have him investigated on its own territory rather than being transferred to Beirut.
In this context, the travel ban on the judicial investigator in the port explosion case, Judge Tarek Bitar, was lifted, allowing him to travel to Bulgaria in hopes of conducting an interrogation that could fill one of the most critical gaps in the file—related to the ship’s route, its cargo, and the entities aware of its destination and the fate of its materials. However, the effort quickly reached a dead end, as Grechushkin refused to answer any questions, forcing Bitar to return to Beirut without any meaningful progress. This outcome subsequently led Bulgarian authorities to decide to release him.
According to judicial sources, this timeline indicates that the events did not go beyond the framework of formal procedures, allowing Bulgaria to justify its final refusal to hand over the detainee to Lebanon, without producing any genuine judicial cooperation to advance the investigation. This outcome negatively affected the progress of the indictment, which remained suspended amid a growing sense that the international aspect of the case was all but closed—or at least beyond the reach of the Lebanese judiciary.
Domestically, the picture is no less bleak. The Beirut Port explosion file, already burdened by obstacles since 2020, is now facing yet another judicial disappointment added to a long history of disruptions.
According to intersecting sources, no indictment decision has been issued, as Judge Bitar is still awaiting a ruling on the abuse-of-power lawsuit filed against him. Although Judge Habib Rizkallah, the investigator in that case, issued a decision to dismiss the trial against Bitar, former Minister Ali Hassan Khalil appealed the ruling, leading to the referral of the file to the Indictment Panel for resolution—effectively freezing any decisive steps toward issuing the indictment.
Caught between the collapse of the international track and ongoing internal judicial disputes, the investigation seems stuck in a gray area—neither officially halted nor able to progress.
The release of the owner of the ship "Rhosus" and the dismissal of all charges against him do not undermine the investigation at its core, but they deepen doubts about the Lebanese judiciary's capacity to see this case through. They also raise the most painful question for victims’ families and the public alike: Is an indictment still possible, or is the port case once again being relegated to an indefinite waiting period?
