NIA Says Terror Probe Against American Mercenary Matthew VanDyke, Six Ukrainians Still Underway

The National Investigation Agency (NIA) has clarified that its probe into the alleged terror links of American mercenary Matthew Aaron VanDyke and six Ukrainian nationals remains underway, days after the agency's chargesheet omitted provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).

The NIA filed its chargesheet before a special Delhi court on Tuesday, invoking provisions of the Immigration and Foreigners Act against the accused. The agency said offences under the law were established during the investigation, while the wider probe into the alleged terror conspiracy remains open.

NIA Says Supplementary Chargesheet Possible

The clarification came amid criticism from the Opposition that the NIA had dropped terror charges against VanDyke and the six Ukrainians.

The agency had initially booked the accused under Section 18 of the UAPA, which deals with conspiracy to commit terrorist acts. However, the provision did not figure in the chargesheet filed on Tuesday.

NIA sources said the chargesheet itself records that the investigation into the alleged terror angle is continuing. Further investigation and supplementary chargesheets can be filed as the probe progresses, they said.

The 180-day period of custody of VanDyke and the other accused was due to expire on September 8, making the filing of a chargesheet necessary.

The agency said the Foreigners Act offences were included because they had been established during the course of the investigation and stressed that this did not mean the wider probe had been closed.

Congress Questions Alleged US Pressure

The omission of UAPA provisions triggered a political controversy, with Congress questioning whether the decision was influenced by the United States.

Congress MP Abhishek Manu Singhvi questioned how allegations involving illegal entry, links with armed groups and drone warfare training could disappear from the case.

Congress spokesperson and Rajya Sabha MP Jairam Ramesh also questioned whether the Government of India had acted under US pressure, asking what India expected in return.

NIA sources, however, said representations by US officials over VanDyke's detention were part of normal consular practice and would not determine the course or outcome of the investigation.

Several US officials have raised concerns over VanDyke's prolonged detention, while his family last month appealed to the Donald Trump administration to intervene.

Why Was VanDyke Arrested?

VanDyke, who has been involved in armed conflicts in Libya and Syria, was detained at Kolkata airport on March 13. The six Ukrainian nationals were arrested at airports in Delhi and Lucknow.

The NIA has alleged that VanDyke and the Ukrainians illegally entered Myanmar through Mizoram, a protected area, and provided arms and drone warfare training to ethnic armed groups fighting Myanmar's military junta.

A Protected Area Permit is mandatory for entry into Mizoram.

The agency has also alleged that the group transported a large consignment of drones from Europe to Myanmar through India.

Last week, the NIA told the special court that the group was allegedly involved in a drone attack on a civilian aircraft in Myanmar. The specific incident referred to by the agency has not been identified.

Local reports in Myanmar in February said a passenger aircraft was struck by a suicide drone while preparing to depart for Mandalay.

The NIA is also examining the group's alleged links with Myanmar-based terror operatives and insurgent groups operating in India.

VanDyke's Background

VanDyke is a prominent figure in conflict zones and has previously been detained. In 2011, he was captured as a prisoner of war by the regime of former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi and was released after the regime collapsed.

He later founded Sons of Liberty International (SOLI), a non-profit security organisation that provides military training to armed groups in conflict zones.

The NIA's investigation into VanDyke and the six Ukrainians is therefore continuing, with the agency retaining the option of filing supplementary chargesheets if further evidence emerges.