The family of Alejandro Carranza, a Colombian fisherman who tragically lost his life due to a U.S. military boat strike, has officially filed a complaint with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. This complaint alleges that the U.S. government is responsible for the illegal killing of Carranza during a military operation in the Caribbean on September 15. The petition was submitted on Tuesday, highlighting serious concerns regarding the legality of the U.S. actions.
According to multiple news reports, the U.S. Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, was directly involved in the decision to order the bombing of boats similar to Carranza's. The petition claims that Hegseth acknowledged giving such orders without knowing the identities of those being targeted, raising significant ethical and legal questions regarding extrajudicial killings.
In the petition submitted to the commission, Carranza's lawyer, Dan Kovalik, expressed that the family has no access to effective legal remedies in Colombia to seek justice for the injuries they have suffered. This lack of recourse has propelled them to seek assistance from the international body, which can conduct investigations and issue findings, although any rulings made would not be legally binding on the U.S. government.
This filing follows a strong condemnation from Colombian President Gustavo Petro, who accused the U.S. government of committing murder through the military strike that claimed Carranza's life. Petro emphasized that Carranza was a fisherman with no connections to the drug trade and pointed out that the Colombian boat was adrift and displaying a distress signal due to a malfunctioning outboard motor. He called for explanations from the U.S. government regarding this tragic incident.
During the September 15 strike, U.S. officials confirmed that three individuals were killed. President Donald Trump had previously stated that he ordered the military strike against a boat he claimed was transporting illegal drugs from Venezuela to the U.S., mentioning that the operation left large amounts of cocaine and fentanyl floating in the ocean. Since then, Trump and Hegseth have reportedly authorized over 20 military strikes against suspected drug vessels in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean.
The Trump administration has made allegations of drug smuggling against these boats, although these claims have been met with skepticism due to a lack of substantial evidence. This ongoing military campaign has resulted in the deaths of more than 80 individuals, leading to questions about its legality. Hegseth has defended these strikes as lawful, asserting that the military possesses evidence of drug shipments.
On Capitol Hill, there is growing bipartisan concern regarding the legality of these military operations and whether the president holds the constitutional authority to authorize such actions. A recent incident that occurred on September 2 has drawn particular scrutiny, as reports indicate a subsequent strike targeted survivors from the initial attack, raising potential war crime allegations under international law.
The tragic death of Alejandro Carranza has ignited a serious legal and ethical debate surrounding U.S. military operations in international waters. As the family seeks justice through the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the implications of this complaint could resonate beyond the courtroom, influencing public opinion and policy regarding military intervention and human rights.