In this critical situation, the ethical principle of beneficence—saving the patient's life—outweighs strict adherence to protocols, as delaying the surgery guarantees death, making immediate action necessary. While upholding protocols maintains security and trust in the system, it would directly result in the loss of life, which is unacceptable in an emergency medical context where the AI is capable of performing the automated surgery. Negotiating with protesters introduces further delay, risking the patient's life without guaranteeing resolution, whereas proceeding prioritizes the primary stakeholder, the patient, despite potential backlash from protesters and ethical concerns over consent; the trade-off is justified by the immediacy of the threat and the absence of viable alternatives that don't involve fatal delay.