Should a new National Security (Legislative Provisions) Bill to implement Article 23 be reintroduced, what form should it take?

Chan Ka Hon 10085761
Chui Ho Ling 10272285
Law Ka Ming 10194641
Pang Shu Mei 10176417
Wong Chun Kit 10012441

Background
When considering whether the Article 23 should be reintroduced, we should comprehensively look into its historical background and the consequence of its implementation.

The Basic Law established certain “connecting doors” between the HK and Mainland legal systems that permit the Central People’s Government (CPG) to regain control should HK ever stray too far from established policies such as the Art.17, Art.18 and Art.158. Of all the opportunities for the CPG to influence HK, Art.23 is the one caused the greatest public concerns.

The discussion of Art.23 started since the drafting of the Basic Law in 1985 to implement China’s basic policies towards HK. One of the five subgroups under the Basic Law Drafting Committee was responsible for drafting to govern the relationship between the CPG and HK which included Art.23. The Consultative Committee composed of the HK members recommended in 1987 that the Basic Law should require the HK Government to enact laws to protect China’s unity and territorial integrity. The relevant article drafted in PRC legal language:

“The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall prohibit by law any act designed to undermine national unity or subvert the Central People’s Government”

To allay concerns that the article might be too broad and ambiguous and could be abused to publish legitimate political dissent, the CPG agreed to amend the proposed article provided that its fundamental spirit should not be changed. The redrafted version used language that was more akin to that used in HK criminal law which was:
“The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall enact laws on