🔗 Share this article

In a notable 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 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 brief hearing before a packed public gallery on Friday, the judge ruled that the evidence presented upheld Singh's conviction.

Leader's Response

Singh, who leads the main opposition Workers' Party, expressed that he was "disappointed" with the decision but accepted it "fully and without reservation".

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

Notwithstanding the verdict, Singh retains his parliamentary seat and stated his commitment to continue serving Singaporeans alongside his colleagues.

The Underlying Saga

The controversy originated in 2021 when Raeesah Khan claimed in parliament that she had witnessed police act inappropriately towards a survivor.

She later confessed her account was untrue, but stated during a parliamentary committee investigation 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 stepped down from both the party and parliament. She was penalized S$35,000 for lying and misusing her legislative immunity.

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 throughout the trial, countered that he had wanted to give Khan time to handle what was a delicate issue.

The Appeal Arguments

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

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

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

The state's attorneys, however, maintained that Singh's inaction, alongside other evidence, demonstrated he never wanted Khan to come clean.

Wider Implications

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

Critics have in the past alleged Singapore's government of using the judiciary to target its rivals—allegations that authorities have always rejected.

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