On June 11, 2026, Washington-based attorney Michael J. Davis issued an open letter to Caribbean legal institutions and practitioners, reiterating and expanding his earlier public call for independent legal review of reported U.S. military strikes under Operation Southern Spear targeting maritime vessels in the Caribbean and adjacent Eastern Pacific waters.
Davis notes that fresh emerging information, alongside ongoing reporting by independent outlets, advocacy from human rights groups, and congressional questioning in the U.S. have deepened urgent concerns over the operations, which public accounts confirm have left dozens dead. A core point of contention raised by human rights defenders is that many of these strikes may fall outside the bounds of traditional armed conflict, meaning they must be evaluated under international human rights law rather than the law of war.
High-profile congressional exchanges between U.S. Senators Tim Kaine, Rand Paul and Secretary of State Marco Rubio have further put a spotlight on gaps in public information about the criteria used to authorize targeted vessel strikes. If the operations are categorized as law enforcement actions against suspected criminal activity rather than military engagements, human rights organizations argue they must adhere to strict legal standards including due process, necessity, proportionality, and the fundamental protection of the right to life.
Davis emphasizes that the core question at hand is not whether these arguments are correct, but whether Caribbean legal bodies are willing to examine them. For generations, he notes, Caribbean jurists have been leading champions of the rule of law, judicial independence, constitutional governance, and human rights, consistently speaking out when democratic institutions face threats, constitutional norms are violated, and regional governments overstep their legal authority. Now, he argues, the region’s legal community must uphold these same principles even when the actions under scrutiny are carried out by a major global power.
“If credible allegations exist that civilians, fishermen, mariners, or other non-combatants have been killed in circumstances raising questions under international law, then those allegations deserve rigorous legal analysis regardless of the nationality of the actors involved,” Davis wrote. He stresses that this call is not an anti-American position, pointing out that the U.S. itself has long promoted accountability, human rights, due process, and the rule of law on the global stage. As an example, Davis cites the recent U.S. indictment of former Cuban President Raúl Castro for the downing of civilian aircraft, which was rooted in the principle that state officials can be held legally accountable for unlawful civilian killings outside the scope of legitimate armed conflict. Davis argues that this principle, which he accepts as valid, must apply equally regardless of which state carries out the actions in question.
Davis outlines eight clear legal questions that require urgent examination: What legal framework governs these maritime operations? Are the targeted individuals lawful military objectives under international law? Does a legally recognized armed conflict exist in the region? What role does international human-rights law play in assessing the use of force? What legal obligations arise under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights? What obligations are set out in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea? What accountability mechanisms exist where civilian casualties occur? What legal remedies, if any, are available to victims and their families? Davis underscores that all of these are purely legal questions, not matters of partisan politics.
Against this backdrop, Davis formally renewes his call for action from a wide range of regional legal stakeholders, including all national Caribbean Bar Associations, the OECS Bar Association, Caribbean law schools and legal scholars, former judges and sitting jurists of the Caribbean Court of Justice, CARICOM regional legal institutions, and practicing attorneys across the Caribbean. He urges these groups to conduct thorough, independent examinations of the issues through academic conferences, formal legal opinions, peer-reviewed scholarly research, amicus curiae submissions, and other appropriate professional forums.
Davis also encourages the exploration of all viable avenues for regional legal review where jurisdictional requirements are met, including examinations tied to territorial jurisdiction, nationality jurisdiction, regional and international human rights obligations, maritime law, and other widely recognized principles of international law.
The attorney stresses that the initiative does not seek to prejudge any government, military operation, or individual official. Instead, its core goal is to ensure that the Caribbean legal community does not stay silent when serious questions arise over the right to life, due process, regional sovereignty, and legal accountability within Caribbean waters.
“Caribbean lives matter under international law. Caribbean sovereignty matters under international law,” Davis wrote. “And the rule of law retains its legitimacy only when it is applied consistently, irrespective of power, politics, or nationality.” He closed the letter by inviting legal professionals, scholars, institutional leaders, and concerned citizens across the Caribbean to join the discussion and help shape the Caribbean legal community’s response to these pressing regional issues.
The letter includes a disclaimer stating that the views expressed are solely those of author Davis, and do not represent the positions of Duravision Inc., Dominica News Online, or any of their subsidiary brands.