🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal ruling, 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 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 presiding judge declared that the evidence presented upheld Singh's guilty verdict.

Leader's Response

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

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 seat in parliament and affirmed his commitment to continue serving Singaporeans alongside his party members.

The Underlying Saga

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

She later admitted her account was fabricated, but stated during a official inquiry that party leaders, such as Singh, had instructed her to "stick to the story" despite knowing it was a lie.

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

Court's Rationale

In February, the court determined that Singh's actions were "strongly indicative" that he did not want Khan to clarify her lie.

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

The Appeal Arguments

During the November court session, Singh's lawyer argued that the lower court had "ignored crucial pieces of evidence" in its initial judgment.

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

When questioned why Singh appeared to be "taking no action" to have Khan confess in the weeks after learning of her lie, his lawyer explained that he had other urgent professional and personal matters to manage.

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

Broader Context

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

Observers have in the past alleged Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to pursue its rivals—allegations that authorities have consistently denied.

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