The US boat strike lawsuit brought by 16 Ecuadorian fishermen is set to challenge the Trump administration over a military drone attack that destroyed their fishing vessel, seriously injured two crew members and allegedly subjected the survivors to unlawful detention and torture.
The fishermen are seeking unspecified financial compensation over the March 17 incident, which occurred in the Pacific Ocean as they returned from a two-week fishing expedition.
Their vessel, the La Negra Francesca Duarte II, was reportedly struck by two armed drones approximately 385 nautical miles from the Ecuadorian port of Manta.
The survivors insist they were ordinary fishermen with no connection to drug trafficking or criminal organisations. They accuse American military personnel of attacking their boat without legitimate justification and subsequently detaining them.
The lawsuit, obtained by The Guardian, is expected to be filed on Monday at the US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania.
Fishermen describe devastating drone attack
The March 17 operation was conducted under Operation Southern Spear, a military campaign announced by the Trump administration in November 2025 to combat individuals it identifies as narco-terrorists operating in the Caribbean and Pacific.
According to the fishermen’s legal filing, the two drones exploded aboard their vessel, setting it ablaze and eventually destroying it completely.
Two members of the crew suffered severe burns after flames engulfed parts of their bodies, particularly their legs, arms and backs.
The other fishermen reportedly abandoned the burning vessel and jumped into the sea before boarding smaller emergency boats.
They said they attempted to row towards an unidentified American military vessel while a surveillance drone continued following them.
Upon reaching the military ship, the survivors alleged that American personnel wearing camouflage uniforms restrained them with zip ties and covered their heads with plastic hoods.
Their ordeal allegedly continued after they were taken away from the scene and transported to a detention facility in El Salvador, where they spent several weeks in custody.
The fishermen eventually returned to Ecuador, but the consequences of the attack have continued to affect their families and livelihoods.
Captain recounts moments before vessel was destroyed
Hernán Flores, captain of the La Negra Francesca Duarte II, previously described the frightening moments when the boat caught fire.
Flores, who had commanded the fishing vessel for approximately 20 years, recalled how the crew initially attempted to contain the flames.
“Some guys looked for an extinguisher, but the fire was already spreading,” he said in an interview in June.
“So some of our crew leapt into the water.”
The destruction of the vessel left the fishermen without the equipment they depended on to earn a living.
Their lawyer, Dan Kovalik, said the men had been unable to return to their normal fishing activities or adequately support their families since the incident.
He explained that the experience of being away from home for weeks, followed by detention in El Salvador, had caused considerable emotional distress.
“They go out fishing, they don’t come home for a month, they’re like in a migrant detention center in El Salvador, and as we know those centers are not so nice,” Kovalik said.
He described the experience as catastrophic, particularly for the two men who suffered serious burns.
“So there’s a lot of trauma there. It was catastrophic for them. They are home now, but they are struggling financially, and the two guys who were hurt bad are still dealing with that,” he added.
Ecuadorian authorities reportedly cleared the fishermen
A major argument in the legal action is that Ecuadorian authorities had inspected the fishing vessel before the American military attack and found no evidence that it was carrying illegal drugs.
The lawsuit states that the local authorities also determined that the crew had no affiliation with drug cartels.
The plaintiffs therefore argue that the American military had no lawful basis to treat them as targets in its campaign against suspected drug traffickers.
They describe the attack as manifestly unlawful and contend that the subsequent detention and treatment of the fishermen amounted to kidnapping and torture.
The filing also challenges the constitutional and legal authority under which the Trump administration has conducted its maritime military campaign.
According to the plaintiffs, the March operation was carried out without congressional authorisation.
They further argue that there was no armed conflict that could justify the use of military force against their fishing vessel or its occupants.
“There is no actual armed conflict that could justify the use of military force against the boats, nor was there one on March 17 when the attack took place,” the lawsuit states.
It adds that the bombing campaign against vessels and individuals who are not involved in an armed conflict violates established international law.
The case could intensify scrutiny of the legal standards governing American military operations against suspected drug-trafficking vessels in international waters.
Nearly 250 people reportedly killed in US strikes
The fishermen’s legal challenge comes amid growing criticism of Operation Southern Spear and the number of people killed during American military operations at sea.
The Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA) estimates that nearly 250 people have died in the attacks carried out under the campaign.
The organisation considers the operations extrajudicial executions, arguing that the US government has not provided evidence establishing that those killed were involved in drug trafficking.
The controversy has raised broader questions about the use of military force against suspected criminals without publicly demonstrated evidence or a clearly established legal process.
The Ecuadorian fishermen’s case adds another dimension to the debate because the survivors are directly challenging the circumstances of an attack they say targeted innocent civilians.
Their lawsuit seeks to establish whether the military had sufficient grounds to destroy their vessel and whether the government can be held responsible for the injuries, detention and financial consequences that followed.
Pentagon declines to discuss pending legal action
The US Department of Defense declined to comment specifically on the allegations, citing its policy concerning ongoing litigation.
A spokesperson said on Friday that the department did not comment on pending or ongoing court cases.
The Pentagon and US Coast Guard had also denied participating in operations involving Ecuadorian fishing vessels when details of the incident first emerged in June.
At the time, a spokesperson for US Southern Command said American forces had no knowledge of the incidents described in reports concerning the fishermen.
“We have no knowledge of, nor were Department of War forces involved in, the incidents described in those reports,” the spokesperson said.
The military command maintained that US forces operated under established legal authorities and were expected to comply with American and international law.
“US forces conduct operations under established legal authorities and hold its forces to the highest standards of professionalism, safety, and compliance with US and international law,” the statement added.
The conflicting accounts are likely to become important as the fishermen pursue their claims in court.
Lawyers seek compensation and wider congressional scrutiny
Kovalik expects the Trump administration to contest the proceedings but believes the Pennsylvania court is suitable because of its experience handling maritime cases.
He said the fishermen wanted compensation for their losses but were also determined to draw attention to the broader military campaign.
“They would also like the US to stop these boat strikes. That’s another goal of all this, and I think the US public and the media have been, honestly, not outraged enough about these strikes,” he said.
The lawyer also believes the proceedings could encourage congressional investigations, particularly with Democrats expected to take control of Congress in January.
He disclosed that some Democratic lawmakers had already expressed interest in holding hearings into the military strikes.
“Some of the Democrats that we met with are very interested in doing hearings on these boat strikes,” Kovalik said.
“We hope this case will encourage the Democrats when they get sworn in in January to start some hearings. I think it will have that impact.”
The legal challenge could therefore become part of a wider political and judicial examination of the administration’s approach to suspected drug-trafficking vessels.
Earlier lawsuit over deaths of Trinidadian fishermen
The Ecuadorian fishermen’s case follows another legal challenge filed against the Trump administration over military strikes at sea.
In January, the families of Chad Joseph, 26, and Rishi Samaroo, 41, two Trinidadian fishermen killed in an American military strike in the Caribbean, initiated proceedings in Massachusetts.
The men had died approximately three months before their relatives filed what was described as a first-of-its-kind lawsuit against the administration over the maritime attacks.
The American Civil Liberties Union is also among the advocacy organisations demanding an end to the operations, describing them as a frightening and lawless campaign of killings at sea.
With the Ecuadorian fishermen now preparing their own case, the Trump administration faces renewed questions about the evidence used to identify targets, the authority for its military operations and the treatment of people detained after attacks.
For the 16 plaintiffs, however, the immediate concern remains the destruction of their livelihood, the physical injuries suffered by two crew members and the lasting consequences of an operation they insist should never have happened.
About The Author
