Lebanon’s Internal Security Forces have reportedly been instructed to execute judicial warrants and carry out official missions in Beirut’s southern suburbs and other Hezbollah strongholds without first seeking approval from the group’s liaison committees, according to Erem News.

The directives, conveyed verbally through command channels rather than in a publicly issued written circular, emphasize that judicial orders are binding and must not be delayed while officers await approval from political parties or non-State actors, the report said.

The directives distinguish between operational coordination to prevent confrontations and seeking permission that could allow Hezbollah to influence when and how security operations are carried out.

Dispute over security coordination

The issue came into focus after a raid by the Central Criminal Investigations Bureau at a pharmaceutical warehouse in the Gallery Semaan area, on the outskirts of Beirut’s southern suburbs.

The operation was conducted under a judicial order issued by the Public Prosecutor of Cassation, Judge Ahmad Rami al-Hajj, according to the report.

The patrol encountered resistance from groups that gathered at the site, prompting the Lebanese army to intervene and secure the operation. Authorities seized medicines and sealed the warehouse with red wax, the report said.

Hezbollah subsequently said the security force had failed to follow an established coordination mechanism, arguing that coordination was necessary given the sensitive security situation and continuing Israeli threats.

Security officials, meanwhile, have defended the right of law enforcement agencies to execute judicial decisions, stressing that warrants issued by the competent authorities cannot be made conditional on approval from a political group.

The reported directives seek to clarify that distinction: coordination may be necessary to ensure an operation proceeds safely, but it must not become a requirement for obtaining permission to enforce the law.

Hezbollah’s liaison network under scrutiny

For years, Hezbollah’s Liaison and Coordination Committee has served as an intermediary between official Lebanese agencies and the group’s security apparatus. The committee has long been associated with Hezbollah security official Wafiq Safa.

The arrangement has provided a channel for communication between state institutions and the group, particularly in areas where Hezbollah maintains a strong presence. But it has also raised questions about whether coordination can give a political organization influence over when and how state authorities carry out their duties.

The reported new instructions appear intended to prevent security concerns from becoming a standing exception to the enforcement of judicial decisions, particularly in cases involving alleged criminal activity, economic offenses and threats to public health.

Under the approach outlined in the report, officers may coordinate with relevant authorities to reduce the risk of confrontation, but should not postpone a lawful operation while awaiting a political party’s consent.

The directives also reportedly call for direct coordination between Internal Security Forces operations rooms and the army command, allowing military support to be mobilized quickly when officers encounter obstruction in the field.

The measures come as security activity has increased in Beirut, including temporary checkpoints and additional patrols following periods of tension and motorcycle convoys in the capital.

Investigation into obstruction

Lebanese authorities have opened an investigation into the obstruction of the Gallery Semaan operation, while surveillance footage is reportedly being reviewed to identify those who took part.

The case is likely to test whether the reported directives translate into concrete enforcement measures or remain primarily a statement of the state’s authority.

It remains unclear whether the instructions have formally replaced the previous coordination arrangements or how consistently they will be implemented. No official confirmation has been issued that the existing mechanism has been abolished.

The broader question is whether Lebanese institutions can exercise their legal powers without political interference in areas where armed groups maintain substantial influence.

The government has repeatedly sought to bring weapons and security decisions under exclusive state control. But the latest developments do not, by themselves, signal an end to Hezbollah’s influence or the dismantling of the parallel security structures that have developed around the group.