The Philippine Office of the Ombudsman has ordered the dismissal from government service of former acting Senate sergeant-at-arms Mao Ranada Aplasca, following an administrative investigation into a shooting incident inside the Senate compound in May. Ombudsman Jesus Crispin "Boying" Remulla said he signed the dismissal order on June 29, wrapping up weeks of inquiry into gunfire that rattled the upper chamber’s premises in Pasay City.

Remulla disclosed the decision in his DZRH radio program "Executive Session" on Saturday, July 4, but withheld specific findings, saying the full written ruling would soon be made public. He described the case as "very serious" and said the detailed legal and factual basis for Aplasca’s removal would be better understood once the decision is released. The Ombudsman earlier placed Aplasca under preventive suspension without pay for six months on May 15, citing the need to prevent him from influencing the investigation.

Aplasca, a retired police general and classmate (mistah) of Senator Ronald "Bato" dela Rosa, had served as acting Senate sergeant-at-arms and as sergeant-at-arms of the Commission on Appointments. He was tagged as the official who allegedly fired the gun during the May 13 incident inside the Senate building, which sits next to the Government Service Insurance System complex in Pasay. It remains unclear whether his dismissal will affect his pension as a retired officer, and the Ombudsman has not yet confirmed the specific administrative offense for which he was found liable, beyond noting that dismissal is among the gravest penalties available.

The Ombudsman’s move now places the spotlight on how the Senate will respond to the order. Implementation of Ombudsman rulings against sitting or former officials has been contentious in the past. When then-Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales ordered the dismissal of Senator Joel Villanueva, then Senate President Vicente "Tito" Sotto III refused to enforce it, and the order was later reversed by Ombudsman Samuel Martires. Remulla acknowledged that his office will publish the Aplasca decision in full, signaling a bid for transparency as the case again tests the balance between the Ombudsman’s disciplinary authority and the Senate’s institutional prerogatives.