[4] The government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) had delayed the matter and had successfully warded off any suggestion to enact a law.

However the controversy over Article 23 began in mid-2002 when Qian Qichen, Vice Premier of the State Council, expressed the PRC government's desire for Hong Kong to pass the required legislation quickly.

Suspicions were exacerbated by the refusal of the HKSAR government to issue a white paper on the legislation, causing groups such as Amnesty International to declare that it had "grave concerns about the proposals in the government's consultation document and the lack of a draft white paper which means that the public still do not know how the legislation will actually be worded."

He pointed out that the PRC currently typically imprisons only the leadership of an organization, and "merely" harass lower-level members because their behavior does not rise to the level of criminal charges.

For example, Macau, which has implemented the national security legislation, identical to the article proposed for Hong Kong, in June 2009 refused transit to mainland China by a Tiananmen student leader Wu'er Kaixi.

[10] Finally, at a time when Hong Kong's economy-inextricably linked to its property index-was in the doldrums, and SARS had had a major impact on life in the HKSAR region, the government's focus on Article 23 had been perceived[by whom?]

as inappropriate, especially since Hong Kong has been a stable place since the 1997 handover from the United Kingdom to the PRC, and that therefore revision of colonial anti-subversion laws was not required.

are concerned about the new law, especially with respect to journalistic criticism of the PRC government and its complex relationship with Taiwan and Tibet, or other matters arising from the possession of official documents.

Some banks in Hong Kong were reported to be considering relocation if the proposed Article 23 was passed, out of the fear that the laws would restrict the free flow of information.

On 7 December 2002, it was reported in the press that ten foreign banks had told the government privately that the introduction of Article 23 would have disastrous consequences for Hong Kong, threatening its demise as Asia's financial capital.

On 1 July 2003, the sixth anniversary of the establishment of the HKSAR, more than a half million Hong Kong residents took to the streets to protest the proceedings regarding the bill, as well as to air other grievances against the administration of Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa.