When is Civil disobedience justified?

Civil disobedience is a known tactic for nonviolent resistance against displeasing government policies and unwanted dictatorial laws. It is reinforced as an active refusal and is carefully applied to be, as I have mentioned before nonviolent, or break any major laws, but still bearing in mind to make an impact as an effective mean of protest.

Essentially Civil disobedience started as a form of protesting against unfair, authoritarian non- democratic imposed laws, such as segregation:
Rosa Parks, in 1955 started what is called “The Montgomery Bus Boycott”, by refusing to sit on the back of the bus as African Americans were obliged to do; Rosa Parks did not obey the racist laws that had been imposed in The United States since the arrival of Africans as slaves.
Parks was deliberately breaking the law, by not sitting where she was supposed to sit at the back of the bus, yet she performed nonviolent actions despite the fact she imposed herself as a protest against this sort of racist, authoritarian laws. In such cases Civil disobedience is justified.

Mahatma Gandhi is also a leading figure of the Civil disobedience movement, as an anti. Colonialist against the English Crown; He refused to obey the prohibition of salt production, that had been commanded by the English in a country that was not theirs.
Gandhi actively refused this commandment and encouraged the Indian population to make salt, and slowly drive the English away back to England. Gandhi also, openly declared that Civil disobedience was an essential right of human beings not to be denied:

“Civil disobedience is the inherent right of a citizen to be civil, implies discipline, thought, care, attention and sacrifice.”
Civil disobedience is a smart, civilized effective mean of opposition that is always justified to defend ourselves form unjust implications form the government , and reinforce beneficial social causes.