BEIRUT, Lebanon — A judge on Wednesday ordered the release of four high-ranking Lebanese security officers, all being held here in connection with the 2005 killing of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. The decision was seen here as a blow to the political movement led by Mr. Hariri’s son, and it underscored the legal pitfalls of a divisive international trial.

The judge, Daniel Fransen of a special international tribunal, said there was not enough evidence to indict the four men, who have been detained without charge since September 2005 and are widely believed to have had some knowledge of the killing or involvement in it. They were the only suspects in the custody of the tribunal, which is based in The Hague and was formed under United Nations auspices after Mr. Hariri’s death in a powerful car bombing on Feb. 14, 2005.

The announcement was met with wild volleys of celebratory gunfire from the officers’ supporters in Beirut and in the southern suburb that is the stronghold of Hezbollah, Mr. Hariri’s political adversary.

“Some Lebanese are not relieved by this decision,” said Saad Hariri, the former prime minister’s son, grim-faced during a news conference here after the decision. But he added that he welcomed any decision from the tribunal in The Hague. He also said releasing the men had disproved recurring accusations that the tribunal was politicized in favor of Mr. Hariri’s allies.

The four — Jamil al-Sayyed, Ali Hajj, Raymond Azar and Mustafa Hamdan — directed the chief security and intelligence services and the presidential guard. They were widely seen as henchmen for Syria, which occupied Lebanon militarily for three decades. Widely believed to have ordered Rafik Hariri’s killing, Syria was forced out of Lebanon under local and international pressure a few months later.

Lebanon is preparing for a crucial parliamentary election in June in which Saad Hariri and his political allies, now in the majority, are facing an alliance led by Hezbollah. Many here believe that the tribunal’s decision could cut into Mr. Hariri’s votes by spreading the impression that Syria could escape being brought to account for the assassination of his father and be emboldened to rebuild its influence here.

Lebanese officials had lobbied to have the decision delayed until after the election, but tribunal judicial figures refused, saying they could not take political considerations into account, said a senior court official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the court’s inner workings.

The first prosecutor in the case, Detlev Mehlis, released a report in 2005 that said that the assassination had been planned by high-level Syrian and Lebanese officials, including some in the inner circle of the Syrian president, Bashar al-Assad. At the time, the tribunal was seen by many as a vehicle for the widespread anger here and in the West over Syria’s role in Lebanon. A string of other political assassinations took place in the following years, and they could still be included as part of the tribunal’s work if they are proved to be related to the attack on Rafik Hariri, in which 22 others also died.

The tribunal has always been controversial in Lebanon. Many supporters have seen it as a way to punish Syria and its proxies here, which they tend to blame for all the assassinations since 2005. By contrast, those in the political opposition, including Hezbollah, see it more as a political weapon aimed at their Syrian ally. They also ask why such a tribunal is warranted for the death of a billionaire politician, Mr. Hariri, and not for the deaths in the many massacres and other assassinations that have taken place here in recent decades.

Disagreements over the tribunal led to a walkout by opposition cabinet ministers in late 2006, setting off a political showdown that crippled Lebanon’s government for 18 months and led it to the brink of another civil war.

Recently, the tribunal appears to have moved more slowly, and the prosecutors who followed Mr. Mehlis have not named any suspects. A major witness retracted a statement that implicated the four officers, undermining the case against them. Their release became almost inevitable after two senior investigators with the tribunal reported that there was not enough evidence to hold the men. The tribunal gained jurisdiction over them when it formally opened on March 1.

The tribunal’s prosecutor, Daniel A. Bellemare, emphasized that the case was bigger than the four men, who could be called as witnesses or even arrested again if more evidence was found. Tribunal officials have said that indictments could be issued later this year.

But many Lebanese seemed to view the officers’ release as a sign that the tribunal might never bring Mr. Hariri’s killers to justice.

“It is a shock,” said Samir Frangieh, one of Saad Hariri’s parliamentary allies. “Everyone knows who these men were and what they did.”

At the same time, joy spread among the officers’ allies, including former President Émile Lahoud, who sent an entourage to the prison to greet Mr. Hamdan, his former bodyguard. At the home of Mr. Sayyed, supporters shouted and hugged one another as news of his impending release was announced.

“We want the truth behind Hariri’s killing,” said Faisal Hamdan, Mr. Sayyed’s brother-in-law, echoing a phrase used by Mr. Hariri’s own supporters to promote their demands for justice. “We want the truth as it really is.”

Hwaida Saad contributed reporting from Beirut, and Marlise Simons from The Hague.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/30/world/middleeast/30lebanon.html?ref=todayspaper&pagewanted=print

Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company