The case you're mentioning is well understood by the Honk Kong citizens, and your suggestions has already been addressed. In fact, the extradition to China was at first only allowed if the crime required 2 years of jail time in Honk Kong to make a case, then after the protests it got pushed to 7 years. But watch this YT video, as the HK citizens tell you why this is still a bad idea: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0i9yVphOZ8

ps: i'm not telling you why because #1) I won't do it justice and #2) it's worth watching the whole YT video.

That is exactly what was proposed by the HKBAR, but obviously it was refused. This isn't really just about extradition, it's about giving China enough power to capture anyone passing through Hong Kong that's worth a bargaining chip or two, which could mean a lot of investors and truly innovative founders here.

I still don't understand why a robust review process cannot prevent China from capturing anyone passing through Hong Kong. What about letting protesters to form a committee to decide how can be extradited?

Because we don't have an army, so naturally power flows to pro-beijing camps. In this game you win by being pro-beijing. ANd there's the effect of diffusion. There's already news on the LegCo security team having to proclaim their political inclination, who're supposed to have to act politically neutral. The only person who refused to take pro-beijing side got bullied, sidelined to the point where she had resort to psychiatrist.

Because legitimacy of legal documents can be a joke, in a "human-based rule of law system" China. Judges and lawyers are openly oppose to this themselves since they can only decide base on prima facie evidence, so they have no real power.

Because China can and does lock people up base on speech, or even thoughts.

Because the only thing the local courts in HK will be able to do is to simply review the "evidence" presented and not able to launch their own investigations as to whether the allegations presented are valid.

In other words, there will never be a robust process because that is simply impossible.

Why not? Firstly it doesn’t have to be a rule based traditional court. A jury panel of hk citizens could examine evidence and have a vote of conscience. Secondly hk citizens who are reviewing extradition cases could be representatives from the protesters, who have shown their will to fight against oppression.

But this is not how the proposed legislation is written, is it?

I should have made this clearer. This proposal wasn't refused by the protestors, it was refused by the government.

I see. I’d agree that the hk government should have done more to convince people that the extradition law will not be abused.

The new law does that, the prior/current law does that. The new law REDUCES the number of codified crimes you can be extradited for, from over 45 down to 37.

What is accurate?

Yes, perhaps mainland China could exert influence over the independent court or counsel and create bargaining chips.

Yes, perhaps many of the protestors don't know the existing and proposed flowchart of how deportations work. Perhaps many do and feel compelled to broadcast their ideological stance.

This is primarily an ideological issue, this is more about the principle itself. The people of Hong Kong want the representatives that they are skeptical of already to know that merely creating the avenue for deportation to China is an ideological line not to cross.