The High Court heard the independent statutory body reached the decision to axe the question after the Education Bureau (EDB) first said it had the effect of “seriously hurting the feelings and dignity of Chinese people”, then made its unprecedented request for invalidation.

Lawyers for the applicant have accused the HKEAA Council of voting under political pressure following high-profile, but impermissible, comments from the government, which not only resulted in wasting students’ efforts but also in creating a chilling effect on future discussions.

Beijing blasts ‘poisonous’ Hong Kong exam question on whether Japan did more good than harm to China during first half of last century

But after a two-day expedited hearing, the judge concluded there was no procedural irregularity or other unfairness in the decision-making process, as the evidence showed “careful, almost exhaustive, deliberations amongst professionals, and the expression of and consideration of numerous differing views from different perspectives”.

Meeting minutes showed the question was invalidated after two full council meetings which concluded – after 12 hours – that the question design was inappropriate and unfair to candidates as it failed to comply with guidelines, failed to deliver the established learning objectives and included one-sided sources on topics that fell outside the curriculum.

Coleman also accepted that it was not the HKEAA’s intention to interfere with academic freedom, and said he did not think the decision “should have any chilling effect curtailing freedom of expression”.

But the judge also acknowledged there was some validity in the applicant’s criticisms, saying the EDB had been “quick to jump into the fray” before communicating with the HKEAA, using language so emotive it “smacked of knee-jerk political correctness and self-censorship of an unattractive kind”.

“Unfortunately, the way in which the EDB and senior government officials have made various public announcements has, to put it mildly, not helped in maintaining the perception of any clear distinction between professional and political statements,” he wrote in a 155-page judgment handed down just four hours after the hearing.

“I’m afraid I do think that some of the public statements made by the EDB and/or the Secretary for Education [Kevin Yeung Yun-hung] were conveyed in a most high-profile and threatening manner.”

Coleman also said it was “disappointing” that Yeung stated “there is no room for discussion” in the question, which the judge believed was “completely at odds with the whole purpose of the question” as it had been formed in a way to promote the ability to tolerate different views and contemplate the middle ground, something which is “now often sadly lacking in wider society” in Hong Kong and beyond.

“Civilised society is the poorer for it. The question is of a sort which gives some hope,” the judge continued. “What the secretary seems to be saying is that there is only one acceptable answer.”

Hong Kong exam question on China and Japan sparked outrage – but debates on potential good from invasions and bloodshed have historical precedent in tests

His prompt ruling means exam papers will continue to be graded based on the new mark-adjustment system the authority devised to compute scores based on candidates’ performance on other questions in the paper. Results are expected to be released on July 22.

The HKEAA welcomed the judgment, saying the marking of the history exam had been completed and it is now in the grading process.

But Isaac Cheng Ka-long, spokesman for the Hong Kong Secondary School Students Action Platform, of which the applicant was a member, said he was very disappointed, as he was worried the judgment might set a precedent for the HKEAA and the EDB to invalidate future questions for political reasons.

“In this day and age of authoritarianism, the courts cannot do justice for the candidates,” Cheng said.