Family of Colombian Fisherman Killed in U.S. Boat Strike Files Human Rights Complaint.

 The family of a Colombian fisherman killed during a U.S. military operation in the Caribbean has filed a formal complaint before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), alleging that the United States carried out an unlawful extrajudicial killing. The case marks the first international human-rights challenge linked to the ongoing U.S. campaign of lethal strikes on boats suspected of drug trafficking.

Alejandro Andrés Carranza Medina, a 35-year-old Colombian man described by his family as a fisherman, died on September 15, 2025, when his small boat was struck by U.S. military fire in Caribbean waters near Colombia. U.S. forces claimed the vessel was involved in drug-smuggling activities, part of an intensified campaign against transnational narcotrafficking networks ordered by the Trump administration.

The U.S. government has not publicly released evidence showing that Carranza was transporting narcotics. His family insists he was at sea to fish for tuna and marlin, as he did regularly.

On December 2–3, 2025, Carranza’s relatives, represented by human-rights attorney Daniel Kovalik, submitted a complaint to the IACHR. The petition alleges that the United States violated international law by using lethal force without confirming the identity or threat posed by those aboard the boat. It further argues that the strike amounted to an unlawful execution.

The complaint names U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth as responsible for authorizing the attacks. The family seeks compensation, accountability, and an end to the ongoing lethal operations.

According to the filing, family members have received threats in Colombia since raising the case—one reason they argue that domestic judicial options cannot guarantee safety or justice.

Carranza’s death is not an isolated incident. Since September 2025, U.S. naval and aerial forces have conducted numerous attacks against vessels suspected of transporting drugs in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific. Media investigations estimate that these operations have resulted in more than 80 deaths, though precise numbers remain undisclosed by the U.S. government.

Some strikes have raised serious legal questions. A Reuters investigation reported allegations that U.S. forces dropped secondary munitions on survivors swimming in the water during at least one attack—an act that experts say could constitute a war crime under international humanitarian law.

Colombian President Gustavo Petro condemned the killing, calling it “murder” and stating that—even if the victim had been involved in drug transport, which the family denies—he did not deserve to be executed by a foreign military.

Legal scholars and human-rights experts have also questioned the legality of the U.S. operations, arguing that lethal force may only be used when an imminent threat is clear, and that suspects must be given an opportunity to surrender.

The IACHR will now decide whether to admit the case, which could lead to an investigation and formal recommendations to the United States. While these decisions are not legally binding, they carry significant diplomatic weight and could influence international perception of U.S. counter-narcotics operations.

The case raises several unresolved issues:

• Whether the U.S. possesses verifiable evidence that Carranza’s boat contained narcotics.

• Whether U.S. forces followed international law requiring distinction, proportionality, and precaution in the use of lethal force.

• Whether the broader U.S. strategy of targeting suspected drug-trafficking vessels is compatible with human-rights norms.

Until more information is released, Carranza’s family maintains that he was an innocent fisherman killed without justification.