🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal ruling, Singapore's main political rival Pritam Singh has failed in his challenge against a conviction of lying to a legislative panel.

In February, 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 packed public gallery on Friday, the presiding judge stated that the evidence presented supported Singh's conviction.

Leader's Response

Singh, who leads the main opposition Workers' Party, expressed that he was "disheartened" with the ruling but accepted it "completely and unequivocally".

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

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

Background of the Case

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

She later confessed her anecdote was fabricated, but testified during a official inquiry that party leaders, including Singh, had advised 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 penalized S$35,000 for lying and misusing her legislative immunity.

Court's Rationale

In February, the court ruled that Singh's actions were "highly suggestive" that he did not want Khan to clarify her lie.

Singh, who maintained his innocence during the entire proceedings, countered that he had wanted to allow Khan space 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 "overlooked key proof" in its initial judgment.

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

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

The state's attorneys, however, argued that Singh's inaction, coupled with other evidence, proved he never intended for Khan to tell the truth.

Wider Implications

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

Observers have in the past alleged Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to target its political opponents—charges that authorities have always rejected.

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