“Hong Kong’s education system is a place where the worst elements of society are assembled and students are being poisoned,” it said.

The commentary also took aim at education sector lawmaker Ip Kin-yuen for defending those involved in setting the question.

The bureau’s demand to invalidate the offending question came a day after it appeared in the city’s university entrance examinations, sparking outrage from pro-establishment figures in Hong Kong and internet users on the mainland for blatantly ignoring the suffering Chinese people endured when Japan invaded and occupied it for eight years, from 1937 to 1945.

Responding on Friday evening, the Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority, an independent and self-funded statutory body, said it would hold a special meeting to discuss the issue as it argued that any invalidation could greatly affect the existing mechanisms of assessing public exams.

The furore sparked by the question once again thrust the city’s education sector – increasingly under fire for being feckless in fostering national education and identity – into the spotlight. Earlier in the week, Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor said the government would be reviewing another controversial subject, liberal studies, which critics had blamed for inciting students to take part in the prolonged social unrest.

During a press conference on Friday, Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung Yun-hung called the history query a “problematic question” and urged the exam authority to make appropriate adjustments to ensure the credibility of the test.

He said the question had deviated from the objectives of the bureau’s Curriculum and Assessment Guide, which included letting students approach past and current events in an impartial and empathetic manner, using a variety of perspectives.

“The attached reading materials are biased towards the same position and the question is leading … it deviates from objective facts,” he said.

Given Japan’s invasion of China, the answer to the question must definitively be “Japan only did harm but no good”, Yeung said. “There is no room for discussion … Such a question was definitely inappropriate to be used in a public exam to objectively test students’ ability.”

On Thursday, more than 5,200 candidates sitting the history exam were asked if they agreed that Japan “did more good than harm to China” between 1900 and 1945, by referring to two excerpts or reading materials and using their own knowledge.

One of the two excerpts was a 1905 article by Ume Kenjiro, a former head of Japan’s Hosei University, describing how important it was to teach Chinese students law and politics if China were to reform itself during the Qing dynasty.

The other excerpt cited parts of a letter from revolutionary leader Huang Xing to Japanese politician Inoue Kaoru seeking financial help, as well as a 1912 contract detailing support provided by Japanese business conglomerate Mitsui to the provisional government of the Republic of China.

Hours after the exam ended, pro-establishment figures and the Hong Kong Federation of Education Workers took offence at the question for playing down the war between Japan and China and the years of suffering the country faced during the Japanese occupation.

The Xinhua commentary lashed out at those responsible for setting the question. “The central government normally would not be involved in the specifics and operation of Hong Kong’s education sector,” the article read.

“But if there are issues which harmed the interests of the nation and Hong Kong and the ‘one country, two systems’ principle … the central government has the right to voice out, and the [Hong Kong] government has the responsibility to handle the issues.”

It also said Ip, the lawmaker, was not qualified to represent the education sector and did not qualify as a teacher.

He was the second opposition lawmaker to be criticised recently by mainland authorities and state media, after the Civic Party’s Dennis Kwok – who had been presiding over meetings of the Legislative Council’s House Committee since October – was accused of using delaying tactics to keep legislation from moving forward.

Mainland internet users had also blasted the question as biased and misleading, with some asking for those who drafted the question to bear responsibility.

At his press conference, Yeung said the bureau would send a team of officers familiar with the history curriculum to meet the exam authority on Monday to investigate the question-setting mechanisms, and whether they had been followed. The bureau would also review its long-term role in monitoring the DSE exams.

Asked if it was “pressurising” the authority, Yeung said the bureau had the responsibility to raise and solve problems related to the public exam.

The bid marked the first time that the bureau has asked the exam body to invalidate a question since the Diploma of Secondary Education (DSE) exams began in 2012, replacing the previous HKCEE and A-levels exams.

On Thursday evening, just hours after pro-Beijing figures spoke, the Office of the Commissioner of the Foreign Ministry in Hong Kong issued a Facebook post, citing the federation’s statement.

The report came with the headline: “‘Japan did more good than harm to China in 1900-1945?’ Hong Kong’s education system cannot become a ‘chicken coop without a flap’!”

Use of chicken coop echoed earlier remarks by Carrie Lam who said the liberal studies programme was fuelling misinformation and false arguments among students.

Ho Hon-kuen, chairman of Education Convergence, said: “The question gives a period between 1900 and 1945, but gives only two pieces of background information that appeared to be on the side of Japan, then asked whether students agree that Japan did more good than harm to China between this period. The leaning behind the question is very strong.”

Dr Lau Chi-pang, chairman of the Diploma of Secondary Education (DSE) world history subject committee, told the Post the question was set unprofessionally and inappropriately.

“The two reading materials point to the same direction of Japan offering help for China,” he said. “It could easily lead some candidate to arrive at the conclusion that Japan ‘did more good than harm to China’ between 1900 and 1945.

“Technically speaking, there were big problems with the question setting,” Lau said, adding that the committee would conduct a postmortem of the exam in September, including the questions and candidates’ performance.

But lawmaker Ip, vice-president of the city’s biggest teachers’ union, blasted the bureau for “overriding education with politics”.

“The bureau should halt its decision to ask the exam authority to invalidate the question,” he said.

After the foreign ministry’s criticism, the bureau lashed out at the exam body for “seriously hurting the feelings” of Chinese people who suffered under the Japanese occupation during World War II, and demanded a review of how questions were set.

A teacher, who identified herself only as Chan and has taught the subject for more than 20 years and marked DSE exam papers before, believed the bureau’s move set a bad precedent. “How can you expect examiners to set questions without fear or favour from now on?”

She said the type of question asking whether a historical actor or event “did more good than harm” was commonplace and decades-old in the city’s history education, and the use of a “thought-provoking” statement could stimulate critical thinking of students.

A candidate surnamed Lau said in his answer he did not agree with the statement and cited three examples of harms – war crimes, economic exploitation and unequal treaties – that outweighed the good presented in the historical reference.

He said he was a victim of the bureau’s decision given he was reasonably confident he had done well in answering the question.

“History is meant to encourage free thinking. If you have to censor thought and cancel the question, why don’t you just eliminate the entire subject?”

Another candidate, Thomas Lo, also believed it was unfair to invalidate the question as there was room for discussion based on students’ own knowledge which was taught during history lessons.

“Besides the two materials provided in the paper, we have learnt a lot on both sides of the [argument] during that historical period. For instance, both Japanese invasion of China, as well as the late Qing reform during the early 20th century, were being taught in class,” he said.

The controversy came a day after the bureau asked the authority to look into reports of alleged “inappropriate comments” on social media by two employees, one of whom was believed to have been involved in the history exam question and assessment method setting.

One post, written in Chinese, read: “If there were no Japanese occupation, would there be a new China? Have you forgotten your origin?”

It was believed to imply the Japanese invasion laid the groundwork for the Communist Party’s rise to power.

The authority’s major function is to administer public exams in the city. It is governed by a council appointed by the city’s leader. The bureau is represented on the council and two of its committees.

Additional reporting by Victor Ting