🔗 Share this article

In a notable court decision, Singapore's opposition leader Pritam Singh has failed in his challenge against a conviction of lying to a legislative panel.

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

During a short hearing before a full public gallery on Friday, the presiding judge stated that the evidence presented upheld Singh's conviction.

Leader's Response

Singh, who heads the main opposition Workers' Party, expressed that he was "disheartened" with the decision but acknowledged it "completely and unequivocally".

He promptly paid his fines at the court complex following the hearing. "It's best to settle this now," he commented to reporters.

Notwithstanding the verdict, Singh keeps his seat in parliament and stated his commitment to continue serving Singaporeans alongside his colleagues.

Background of the Case

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

She later confessed her account was untrue, but stated during a official inquiry that party leaders, such as Singh, had instructed her to "stick to the story" even though they were aware it was a lie.

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

Court's Rationale

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

Singh, who protested his innocence during the entire proceedings, argued that he had wanted to give Khan time to deal with what was a sensitive issue.

Points Contested

During the November court session, Singh's legal counsel contended that the initial 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 assistants, who provided testimony.

When asked why Singh appeared to be "doing nothing" to have Khan confess in the weeks following his discovery of her lie, his lawyer stated that he had other pressing commitments to attend to.

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

Wider Implications

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 authorities have consistently denied.

The Workers' Party is the sole rival group in Singapore's present legislature, where it occupies 12 out of 99 seats.