The gunfire that former Senate sergeant-at-arms Mao Aplasca unleashed on May 13 was not a justified response to any real threat, the Office of the Ombudsman concluded, rejecting the central defense the retired police general offered for pulling the trigger.
In an 18-page decision dated June 25, the anti-graft body found that the National Bureau of Investigation agents near the Senate complex placed Aplasca in no actual peril, undercutting his account that he opened fire to protect himself and his personnel. The Ombudsman determined that his warning shots lacked any sufficient basis and instead exposed bystanders to serious risk inside the building.
“The unjustified discharge of firearm caused panic and disturbance, endangered the lives of unarmed journalists and Senate personnel, and resulted in the emotional distress of some Senators,” the decision read. “Aplasca’s deplorable acts must not be countenanced, and for this reason, he must be held administratively liable.”
The ruling held Aplasca accountable for grave misconduct and gross neglect of duty. According to the decision, his resort to firearms breached established rules on the use of force and reflected a disregard for his responsibility to keep order and security within the chamber he was sworn to protect.
The penalties imposed were among the harshest available against a public official: removal from government service, cancellation of his civil service eligibility, forfeiture of retirement benefits, and a permanent bar from holding any government post again.
The administrative case grew out of the exchange of gunfire between OSAA personnel and NBI agents near the boundary of the Senate and the Government Service Insurance System building. Aplasca, who admitted firing first, had insisted the agents refused to lower their weapons and took a tactical stance, leaving him no choice but to respond. The Ombudsman was unpersuaded, finding that no lawful ground existed for the shots he fired that night.
Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla had first disclosed the dismissal on July 4 through his DZRH radio program without spelling out the reasons, saying only that the full text would be published so the public could examine it. The written decision, released this week, laid out for the first time the specific findings against the former security chief.
Beyond this administrative penalty, Aplasca remains the subject of a separate criminal complaint for obstruction of justice lodged with the Ombudsman, filed together with Senators Alan Peter Cayetano and Robin Padilla over the same episode.
