India Allows American Man and Six Ukrainians Accused of Training Myanmar Insurgents to Go Home
India has allowed an American and six Ukrainians accused of training Myanmar-based ethnic armed groups in drone warfare to return home, months after their arrest on terrorism allegations. The NIA has since filed immigration charges instead of the UAPA terrorism charges under which the case was initially registered, while its investigation into the alleged Myanmar activities continues.
Reading
In a Nutshell
- India arrested Matthew Aaron VanDyke and six Ukrainians in March over allegations that they crossed into Myanmar from Mizoram to train ethnic armed groups in drone warfare.
- The NIA initially charged them under the UAPA, but its September 8 chargesheet invoked immigration offences instead.
- The court granted default bail after the NIA failed to complete its UAPA investigation within the 180-day statutory period.
- All seven were allowed to travel home for one month, with VanDyke going to the US and the Ukrainians to Ukraine.
Context
The NIA alleged that the seven entered India on tourist visas, travelled to Mizoram without the required permits and crossed into Myanmar for training in drone warfare, assembly and jamming. It also linked them to a February drone attack on a civilian aircraft in Kachin state that damaged the plane but caused no injuries.
The case was initially registered under Section 18 of the UAPA. By September, however, the NIA’s chargesheet covered only immigration offences. The agency said its UAPA investigation was continuing and that further charges could follow if more evidence emerged.
Why It Matters
The change in charges became critical when the 180-day period for the UAPA investigation expired. The court found that the NIA’s immigration chargesheet did not complete the investigation into the alleged UAPA offences, so it could not prevent the accused from receiving default bail.
VanDyke’s immigration offences were later compounded after he paid Rs5.5 lakh, and the court discharged him from those charges. The NIA also told the court that the seven did not need to remain in India while its investigation continued.
What We Think
Why did the NIA need more than 180 days to investigate allegations this serious? And if the agency could not complete the terrorism case within that period, what evidence did it have when the seven were arrested under the UAPA in the first place? The NIA now has to pursue the central allegations without the accused in Indian custody, after the immigration case that kept them there was resolved.