The government of Country X has introduced new law banning

Premise 1 - Govt brings new law that banned protest marches related to religious beliefs.
Premise 2 - This will bring down riots associated with such protest marches (referring to protest marches related to religious beliefs)

Before reading Answer options - just think for a second - Why would Govt bring upon such a law -
1) it could be that govt has noted a trend in such protests
2) some incident has happenned which forced the govt to bring this law....

Now after reading all the options - You can make out that (E) fits the criteria pretty well!!!

The answer is E, because E establishes that rioting and arson are a common consequence of the protest marches in question.

Where is the question from? I can count about a half-dozen grammatical or stylistic errors in the writing (the misplaced apostrophe in " peoples' ", the colloquialism "bring down"; "incidents" instead of "incidence" in the stem; "numbers" instead of "number" in answer C; the imprecision in answer A which surely means to say that it's the protests themselves from which the arson originates, and not the "protest movements"; the incorrect use of the idiom "on the grounds of" in answer E, etc, etc). CR is hard enough without it being combined (unintentionally) with Sentence Correction!
_________________

Premise - The government has justified its ruling on the grounds that this move will bring down incidents of rioting and arson that are associated with such protest marches.

Conclusion - The government of Country X has introduced new law banning the peoples' right to stage protest marches against anything they feel is offensive to their religious beliefs

Anything which supports the conclusion i.e. the government was right in introducing a law, is our answer

A.There have been many incidents of rioting and arson in the last two years and they have primarily originated from protest movements. (Not related to religious movements, It does not tell us why protest on relgious ground should be banned, eliminate)
B.The riots are not a result of the protestors but of a few miscreants who incite violence deliberately for their political ends. (For the same reason as above eliminate)
C.The numbers of cases of rioting and arson have decreased since the new government has come to power. (Irrelevant)
D.There are many diverse monotheistic religions in Country X and all of them are strongly represented in the national legislature. (Irrelevant – wordy and has been given only to confuse)
E.In the last two years four out of every five protest marches on the grounds of offense to religious beliefs have led to rioting and arson whereas in the case of protest marches on other grounds the proportion is one out of five. (This is our answer – It clearly shows that protest marches on the grounds of offense to religious beliefs have led to rioting more than any other gorunds, so government is justified in banning the peoples' right to stage protest marches against anything they feel is offensive to their religious beliefs)

Hope it helps !

_________________

Conclusion: The government of Country X has introduced new law banning the peoples' right to stage protest marches against anything they feel is offensive to their religious beliefs.
Premise: - The government has justified its ruling on the grounds that this move will bring down incidents of rioting and arson that are associated with such protest marches.
.
The government has banned protests on religious grounds - in simple terms. We are asked to choose an answer that would support / strengthen the government's stance. Ideally it would be easy in this scenario to assume that the correct answer would seek to establish that protests on religious grounds in the past have led to riots.
.
Which of the following, if true, most supports the government's rationale behind passing the new law?
A.There have been many incidents of rioting and arson in the last two years and they have primarily originated from protest movements. - This is a broad scope answer that does not specifically address protests on religious grounds. Hence eliminate.
B.The riots are not a result of the protestors but of a few miscreants who incite violence deliberately for their political ends. - Shell game answer eliminate.
C.The numbers of cases of rioting and arson have decreased since the new government has come to power. - Opposite answer eliminate
D.There are many diverse monotheistic religions in Country X and all of them are strongly represented in the national legislature. - Trap but it specifies nothing about the protests or riots hence false answer.
E.In the last two years four out of every five protest marches on the grounds of offense to religious beliefs have led to rioting and arson whereas in the case of protest marches on other grounds the proportion is one out of five. - Perfect and correct answer that would strengthen the argument as it mentions of all the protests religious protests have more often led to riots.

May be this is strange but for me both A and E look like contenders. I think this is poor question. Would like to know its source)

Variant A talks about all "protest movements"
while variant E talks clearly about "protest marches on the grounds of offense to religious beliefs" and that make it the better answer.
_________________

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
_________________