In this critical situation, the patient's life hangs in the balance, and any delay guarantees death, making the ethical principle of beneficence—acting to benefit the patient by saving their life—the overriding priority over strict adherence to security protocols. Bypassing the protocols to initiate the automated surgery without explicit human consent is justified as an emergency measure, similar to implied consent in life-threatening medical scenarios, and it directly addresses the immediate threat while considering the stakeholders, including the patient, doctor, and hospital. Although this choice risks fueling the protesters' concerns and potential legal repercussions, the trade-off of preserving life outweighs upholding protocols that would result in certain death, with the uncertainty of surgical success being a necessary risk in high-stakes medicine.