The shooting death of a democratically elected public official while on duty has exposed deep fractures in the country’s security apparatus and raised urgent questions about the erosion of the rule of law. Despite having informed authorities about threats against his life, no protective measures were taken—a failure that speaks volumes about the state’s inability or unwillingness to safeguard even its own officials.

The statistics paint a grim picture. From January 1 to October 22, 2025, the country has witnessed 101 shootings, resulting in 52 deaths and 56 injuries. These numbers represent not just abstract data points, but lives lost, families shattered, and a society increasingly governed by the law of the gun rather than the law of the land.

The government has characterized the recent killing as “the result of an underworld conflict,” but this explanation fails to address the fundamental crisis at hand. When a legally elected public servant can be gunned down during public service hours, it signals a catastrophic failure of state security and the rule of law itself.

The methods of dealing with criminals have undergone a troubling evolution. Previously, extrajudicial killings were disguised as incidents where criminals allegedly died during clashes during missions to uncover concealed weapons. Today, even this thin veneer has been stripped away. Open clashes between groups now occur with apparent impunity, resulting in shootings and killings in broad daylight.

This shift reveals a dangerous truth: the state may be losing its monopoly on violence, or worse, may be complicit in its arbitrary application.

Why the Rule of Law Matters

It is unacceptable to kill a person on the street, regardless of their criminal status or underworld affiliations. The principle is simple yet fundamental: if someone has committed a crime, the law of the land should be applied, not the law of the underworld. To argue that killing someone because they are a criminal is not itself a crime is to fundamentally misunderstand the nature of justice.

A legal framework must exist, and judicial proceedings must be properly implemented. Without these safeguards, several critical problems emerge:

When shooters can carry out killings and escape safely despite established security arrangements, it calls into question the security of the entire society. If public officials cannot be protected, what safety can ordinary citizens expect?

The public can clearly observe the problematic nature of the system when such incidents become routine. When violence occurs “every day somewhere,” it normalizes chaos and undermines faith in state institutions.

A state unable to maintain the rule of law faces consequences beyond its borders. International perceptions of instability affect investment, diplomatic relations, and the country’s standing in the global community.

Opposition activists correctly note that when legally elected officials face such threats during public service, the very foundation of democratic governance is imperiled.

The Need for Systemic Reform

The daily occurrence of shootings and underworld activities demands more than tactical responses. New solutions and comprehensive plans are urgently needed to suppress criminal activity within the boundaries of law, not outside them.

The current situation presents a choice: continue down a path where violence and extrajudicial action become normalized, or recommit to the principle that all crimes, regardless of who commits them and against whom, must be addressed through legal channels.

A society where criminals can be killed with impunity is not a safer society; it is simply one where the definition of “criminal” becomes dangerously fluid, and where today’s enforcer of unofficial justice may become tomorrow’s victim.

The question posed,”When will we see the end of a criminal state?” demands urgent attention. A state that cannot protect its own elected officials, that allows shootings to occur with alarming frequency, and that may tacitly endorse extrajudicial killings, risks becoming the very thing it claims to fight against.

The path forward requires political will, institutional reform, and a recommitment to the principle that justice must be blind, legal, and applied equally to all. Anything less is not security, it is chaos with a badge.