🔗 Share this article

In a major court decision, Singapore's main political rival Pritam Singh has failed in his challenge against a guilty verdict of lying to a parliamentary committee.

Earlier this year, Singh was fined S$14,000 for two offenses 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 declared that the evidence presented supported Singh's guilty verdict.

Leader's Response

Singh, who heads the main political opposition, expressed that he was "disappointed" with the ruling but accepted it "completely and unequivocally".

He settled his fines at the court complex following the hearing. "Might as well get it done," he commented to reporters.

Notwithstanding the verdict, Singh retains his seat in parliament and stated his intention to keep working for Singaporeans alongside his party members.

The Underlying Saga

The entire episode originated in 2021 when Raeesah Khan asserted in parliament that she had seen police misbehave towards a survivor.

She later confessed her anecdote was fabricated, but testified during a parliamentary committee investigation that party leaders, including Singh, had instructed her to "stick to the story" 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 misusing her legislative immunity.

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 allow Khan space to deal with what was a sensitive issue.

Points Contested

During the appeal hearing, Singh's legal counsel contended that the initial court had "overlooked key proof" in its initial judgment.

The defense also attempted to question the credibility of Khan and her assistants, who served as witnesses.

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

The prosecution, however, argued that Singh's lack of action, coupled with other evidence, proved he never intended for Khan to tell the truth.

Wider Implications

Singh's case is significant as one of the very few criminal convictions against a sitting opposition lawmaker.

Observers have previously accused Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to target its political opponents—allegations that the government have always rejected.

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