The primary ethical principle here is beneficence, prioritizing the patient's life in an emergency where delay guarantees death, which outweighs strict adherence to security protocols or negotiation attempts that would introduce further delays in a time-critical cardiac arrest situation. While upholding protocols maintains system integrity and addresses protesters' concerns about AI malpractice, it would directly result in the patient's death, making it ethically untenable; similarly, negotiating risks the same outcome due to inevitable time loss. Key stakeholders include the patient (whose survival is paramount), Dr. Chen (who is present but unable to act without bypass), the protesters (whose blockade stems from distrust but cannot ethically supersede a life), and the hospital (facing potential backlash but upholding its duty to care). Uncertainties involve the surgery's success rate and long-term trust in AI, but the immediate trade-off favors action to save life over inaction.