🔗 Share this article

In a notable court decision, Singapore's main political rival Pritam Singh has lost his appeal against a conviction of lying to a parliamentary committee.

Earlier this year, Singh was fined S$14,000 for two charges related to his management of former lawmaker Raeesah Khan, who had admitted to giving false testimony in parliament.

During a brief hearing before a full public gallery on Friday, the judge ruled that the evidence presented upheld Singh's guilty verdict.

Reaction from the Accused

Singh, who heads the main opposition Workers' Party, expressed that he was "disheartened" with the ruling but acknowledged it "fully and without reservation".

He settled his fines at the courthouse following the hearing. "It's best to settle this now," he commented to the press.

Notwithstanding the verdict, Singh retains his parliamentary seat and affirmed his intention to continue serving Singaporeans alongside his party members.

The Underlying Saga

The entire episode began in 2021 when Raeesah Khan asserted in parliament that she had witnessed police act inappropriately towards a sexual assault victim.

She later admitted her account was untrue, but testified during a parliamentary committee investigation that party leaders, such as Singh, had advised her to "continue with the narrative" despite knowing it was a lie.

Khan has since stepped down from both the party and parliament. She was penalized S$35,000 for lying and abusing her parliamentary privilege.

Judicial Reasoning

In February, the court determined that Singh's actions were "highly suggestive" that he did not want Khan to correct the falsehood.

Singh, who maintained his innocence throughout the trial, countered that he had wanted to give Khan time to handle what was a sensitive issue.

Points Contested

During the appeal hearing, Singh's legal counsel contended that the lower court had "ignored crucial pieces of evidence" in its original ruling.

The defense also sought to cast doubt on the reliability of Khan and her aides, who served as witnesses.

When questioned why Singh appeared to be "doing nothing" to have Khan confess in the weeks after learning of her lie, his lawyer stated that he had other urgent professional and personal matters to manage.

The state's attorneys, however, maintained that Singh's lack of action, coupled with other evidence, demonstrated he never intended for Khan to come clean.

Broader Context

Singh's case is notable as one of the rare criminal convictions against a sitting opposition lawmaker.

Critics have previously accused Singapore's government of using the judiciary to target its political opponents—charges that the government have always rejected.

The Workers' Party is the only opposition party in Singapore's current parliament, where it occupies 12 out of 99 seats.