Colombia's New Drone Rules Leave Traveler's Equipment Detained at Bogotá Airport

María Isabel Vélez was waiting in a car at Bogotá's El Dorado Airport when she realized her DJI drone—a compact device she'd purchased in the Philippines—was not coming home with her. The Medellín travel influencer had made a routine stop on her way back to Colombia when customs officials asked what was in her carry-on. She told them about the drone. What followed was a series of procedures, explanations about security threats, and ultimately, the confiscation of equipment she believed she could retrieve with some paperwork.

In a video posted to TikTok that quickly circulated, Vélez described her confusion and frustration. Officials had told her that drones were being used for illegal purposes in Colombia—loaded with explosives, deployed by armed groups—and that new restrictions were in place to prevent such misuse. She accepted their explanation and handed over the device, assuming the process would be straightforward. "I was super naive," she said in the video. "I just gave them my drone." But when she consulted with customs agencies afterward, she learned that recovering it would cost far more than the device itself, likely exceeding the three million pesos she had originally paid.

Vélez's experience reflects a significant shift in how Colombia is managing the entry of unmanned aircraft. In January 2026, the National Tax and Customs Directorate (DIAN) issued Resolution 242, establishing new controls on drone imports and entry. The regulation requires travelers and importers to file advance declarations for any unmanned aircraft and their components. More importantly, it restricts the ports and entry points through which drones can legally enter the country. The DIAN framed the measure as essential to preventing illegal importation and mitigating risks from criminal use—drones weaponized for attacks on civilians or security forces, or deployed in drug trafficking operations.

The agency explicitly discouraged travelers from attempting to bring drones into Colombia as personal baggage. In most cases, officials explained, such equipment must be processed through formal import procedures rather than treated as standard luggage. This means someone arriving with a drone purchased abroad without prior customs clearance faces potential detention, reclassification of their import status, or confiscation. The practical effect is that casual travelers like Vélez—people who bought a device abroad intending to use it for content creation—can find themselves caught in a regulatory framework designed for a different kind of threat.

The security concerns driving these rules are not abstract. Colombia's Civil Aeronautics Authority (Aerocivil) has been running a campaign called "Fly Legal, Fly Safe," warning that even small drones pose risks to commercial aviation if operated near airports or critical infrastructure. The authority enforces regulations contained in RAC 100, which covers drone registration, operational categories, permits, and restricted zones. Violations can result in substantial fines—up to 55 times the current monthly minimum wage, depending on the severity of the infraction and the danger posed. For context, that could mean penalties in the millions of pesos for unauthorized operation.

Vélez's case has resonated with other travelers and drone users who took to social media expressing similar confusion about the new rules. Some reported missing flights while customs officials processed their equipment. Others questioned whether the procedures were standard practice or whether they had been singled out. The influencer herself appealed for clarity, asking in her video whether someone working at the airport could explain what had happened to her—whether she had been treated unfairly or if this was simply how things now worked for anyone bringing a drone into the country.

Neither the DIAN nor Aerocivil has publicly addressed Vélez's specific case. It remains unclear whether she has formally initiated any process to attempt recovery of her drone. What is clear is that her experience has underscored a gap between the regulatory changes and public awareness of them. Travelers who purchased drones abroad before January 2026 may not have known that the rules had changed, or how dramatically. The new framework requires advance planning, documentation, and often the involvement of customs brokers—steps that casual travelers typically do not take.

The case has also highlighted the need for better communication about these regulations before people buy equipment overseas. For anyone planning to bring a drone into Colombia, the message is now unavoidable: check the customs and aeronautical rules first. The window for casual, undeclared entry has closed. What remains to be seen is whether the DIAN and Aerocivil will provide clearer guidance on the recovery process for equipment already detained, or whether cases like Vélez's will become a cautionary tale that simply discourages travelers from attempting to bring drones into the country at all.