Aplasca’s dismissal due to grave misconduct, gross neglect of duty

MANILA, Philippines — The Office of the Ombudsman on Tuesday said it dismissed Mao Ranada Aplasca as acting Senate sergeant-at-arms (SAA) due to grave misconduct and gross neglect of duty which led to the shooting incident in the upper chamber.

Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla only announced the dismissal of Aplasca over the weekend, but the anti-graft body already promulgated its 18-page decision dated 25 June 2026.

READ: Ombudsman: Former Senate sergeant-at-arms Aplasca dismissed from service

Article continues after this advertisement

The dismissal from the service, has accessory penalties of cancellation of eligibility, forfeiture of retirement benefits, and perpetual disqualification from re-employment in the government service.

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

But since Aplasca had already retired from government service, the Ombudsman decision stated that the penalty shall be converted into a fine equivalent to one year’s salary, deductible from his retirement benefits, accrued leave credits, or other receivables, while the accessory penalties remain in effect.

Aplasca, through Remulla’s order, had been suspended since May 15 after the Ombudsman created a team to look into the shooting incident between Office of the Sergeant-at-Arms (OSAA) personnel and National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) agents at GSIS Complex on May 13.

READ: Ombudsman Remulla tells Cayetano to enforce Aplasca’s suspension

Aplasca admittedly fired the warning shot, which prompted the NBI to fire back.

Article continues after this advertisement

“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 Ombudsman decision said. “Aplasca’s deplorable acts must not be countenanced, and for this reason, he must be held administratively liable.”

Aplasca said in his defense that he believed unidentified armed individuals posed a threat to the Senate, making warning shots necessary, but the anti-graft body said the essential element of unlawful aggression was absent.

Article continues after this advertisement

Also, the anti graft-body noted that, before Aplasca fired his weapon, the NBI agents had already identified themselves and were merely positioned along the hallway leading to the GSIS premises.

“There is no actual, sudden, unexpected or imminent danger to Aplasca and the OSAA,” the decision said. “If there was aggression, it was Aplasca who started the same.”

The Ombudsman noted that even the Philippine National Police’s rules only allow the use of warning shots in exceptional circumstances. Quoting the 2021 Revised PNP’s Operational Procedures, the decision stated that “police shall not use warning shots during police operation except when the police officer is outnumbered and overpowered, and his/her life and limb are in imminent danger.”

None of these conditions existed in the incident involving Aplasca, leading the anti-graft body to conclude that he “deliberately disregarded established rules.”

The shooting incident occurred two days after Dela Rosa showed up at the Senate after being in hiding for over six months.

On May 11, armed with the International Criminal Court warrant, NBI agents tried to arrest Dela Rosa when he surfaced in the Senate.

But the senator managed to elude them and get “protective custody” from the chamber, which was granted by a newly installed Senate President, Alan Peter Cayetano.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

After the tension prompted by the shooting incident, Dela Rosa went back into hiding after leaving the chamber’s premises with Sen. Robinhood Padilla aboard the latter’s vehicle in the early hours of May 14. /cb