Former Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Mao Aplasca has declared his plans to challenge the Ombudsman’s decision to dismiss him over the May 13 Senate shooting, claiming the ruling was based on fragmented and biased evidence.
The anti-graft body recently found Aplasca guilty of grave misconduct and gross neglect of duty after concluding that National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) agents posed no threat and that Aplasca initiated the gunfire.
Aplasca strongly disputed this narrative, alleging that video footage presented by the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) was selectively edited.
According to the former security chief, unreleased segments from the night of the incident show an NBI agent drawing a weapon and later returning with backup to continue the confrontation.
“They even went back to attack us before finally retreating because of the preventive fires we made, which served as tactical barriers to prevent them from further attacking us… We were hoping that the DILG presentation would show all of these but they only selected portions that would suit their narrative,” Aplasca stated.
He also rejected claims that the NBI agents had complied with orders to stand down, asserting that his team was simply fulfilling its duty to protect the Senate from unidentified armed individuals.
“It was the other way around. We just did our job, based on our mandate, in protecting the Senate and the senators, staff and visitors from unknown armed intruders. I commend my men for a successful operations in resolving the security threat without casualty,” he added.
Aplasca further questioned how investigators evaluated the danger present during the high-stakes standoff, which occurred on the same night Senator Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa escaped custody amid an International Criminal Court warrant.
“I don’t know how they define threat and aggression. When an intruder to your security jurisdiction pick up his high powered firearm after being challenged and ordered to stand down will not comply but instead point his firearm to the security personnel in charge of the facility what options do you have in this threatening situation,” he remarked.
Despite his defense, the Ombudsman maintained that the NBI agents had properly identified themselves and that Aplasca’s warning shot violated standard police operational protocols. The ruling emphasized that the firefight put civilians, including reporters and Senate staff, in unnecessary danger.
Because Aplasca has already retired, his dismissal has been converted into a fine equivalent to one year’s salary, alongside the forfeiture of his benefits.