A decade after deadly clashes erupted across Manila during anti-corruption demonstrations on September 21, Interior Secretary Jonvic Remulla has broken silence on the death of a civilian bystander, insisting the fatal shot came from an unregistered weapon rather than from police weapons. Speaking at a La Salle Institute of Governance forum in Manila on Thursday, Remulla provided details of how the shooting occurred and moved to distance the Philippine National Police from responsibility for the fatality.
The victim, identified by human rights organisation Karapatan as Eric Saber, a 35-year-old construction worker, became caught in the crossfire during the chaotic protests. According to the group's findings, Saber suffered a gunshot wound to the neck, as confirmed by forensic pathologist Raquel Fortun's autopsy examination. His presence at the location appeared incidental to the larger security operation, positioning him as an unintended casualty of the broader unrest rather than a target of police action.
Remulla's account emphasises the precautions taken during the operation, stating that senior leadership had explicitly prohibited the deployment of firearms during crowd management activities. He highlighted the presence of SWAT units positioned at a distance from the main operational zone, serving as backup rather than frontline responders. This strategic arrangement, he suggested, reflected institutional awareness of the risks posed by armed interventions in densely populated urban environments where civilians might be present.
The Interior Secretary presented forensic evidence to support his assertion of police non-involvement. He noted that authorities had traced the bullet and identified its source through serial number tracking, confirming that the firearm belonged neither to the Philippine National Police nor fell within the inventory of officially deployed security personnel. This technical investigation became central to Remulla's argument that the death resulted from factors beyond institutional control.
Geographical evidence further buttressed Remulla's position. He emphasised that the location where Saber was fatally struck lay approximately one kilometre distant from the primary engagement area where police operations were concentrated. This distance, he contended, made police responsibility implausible given the dispersal of law enforcement units and the separation of operational zones. The positioning suggested that the fatal shot originated from an entirely different locale and circumstance.
The broader context of weapon proliferation in Philippine society underpins Remulla's explanation. He estimated that approximately 98 per cent of gun-related criminal incidents involve unregistered or loose firearms—weapons outside the formal registration system and therefore beyond regulatory oversight. Within this category, roughly half trace back to individuals dismissed from the Philippine National Police or Armed Forces of the Philippines, former security personnel who retained access to weapons after separation from service. This pattern indicates a systemic challenge of weapons management that extends well beyond any single incident.
Karapatan's response highlights the gap between official findings and independent scrutiny. The human rights group has called for a comprehensive investigation into the circumstances surrounding Saber's death, suggesting that simply attributing the fatality to an anonymous unregistered weapon may prove insufficient without broader examination of who discharged the firearm and under what conditions. This demand reflects longstanding tensions between government security agencies and civil society organisations over accountability in protest-related incidents.
For Malaysian observers, the incident underscores challenges faced across Southeast Asia in managing large-scale demonstrations whilst protecting both public safety and individual rights. The existence of uncontrolled firearms circulating in urban environments presents genuine hazards during civil unrest, complicating the distinction between institutional responsibility and broader security failures. The difficulty of establishing provenance and accountability for weapons involved in chaotic situations mirrors concerns in other regional contexts.
The nine-month delay in publicly disclosing details of the shooting has allowed interpretations to solidify and polarise viewpoints between official and civil society accounts. This temporal distance, combined with the absence of contemporaneous transparency, enabled narratives to develop independently before formal explanation arrived. The presentation of findings at a governance institute rather than through broader public channels suggests official preference for addressing academic and elite audiences rather than general populations affected by security operations.
The incident also illustrates how weapons proliferation—particularly involving former military and police personnel—creates persistent security challenges that transcend individual operational decisions. When roughly half of loose firearms originate from dismissed security forces, the problem points to institutional systems for decommissioning weapons and monitoring former personnel. Addressing such systemic issues requires coordination across multiple agencies and sustained commitment to weapon recovery and registration programmes.
Remulla's assurance that the Philippine National Police bore no responsibility, whilst perhaps technically accurate regarding the specific fatality, does not resolve broader questions about institutional accountability during mass protest situations. The presence of security personnel in operational zones, even at distance, entails responsibilities for minimising civilian risk and responding to emergencies that claim innocent lives. Establishing technical non-involvement differs from addressing institutional obligations to protect public safety.
Moving forward, the case demonstrates persistent need for transparent, timely disclosure of incident details and independent verification of official accounts. When deaths occur during security operations, whether caused by police action or coincidental to such operations, democratic accountability demands clear communication and willingness to subject official findings to external scrutiny. The interplay between Remulla's forensic evidence and Karapatan's continued demands for investigation suggests that technical conclusions about weapon origins, whilst important, do not automatically resolve questions of institutional responsibility and systemic oversight.
