The third sentence in the preamble reads:
”Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,”
A rebellion many times starts with demonstrations. Such demonstrations have a touch of hysteria. In contrast the Rule of Law have a touch of severity. As follows in the Articles every man has the right to demonstrate. And to demonstrate usually is included in the Right to expression. I understand this sentence as a strong defence of the Rule of Law. A nations acceptance of the laws is founded in a sound adherence to the principles of democracy. Consequently the opposition against tyranny shall be by reason and free opinion. Rebellion is only the last resort. This is not easy to achieve for those living in a totalitarian state.
The liberalism is against all violence and the liberals are not very prone to demonstrations. And in a tyranny the Rule of Law is not the same as the Rule of law in a liberal and democratic sense. Spain and Portugal left the dictatorship peacefully. Tunisia is still struggling to get a working democracy. Most dictatorial regimes will have a long time development to change. And many fails.