🔗 Share this article

In a major court decision, Singapore's main political rival Pritam Singh has lost his appeal against a guilty verdict of providing false statements to a legislative panel.

In February, Singh was ordered to pay S$14,000 for two offenses connected with his management 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 declared that the evidence presented supported Singh's conviction.

Reaction from the Accused

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

He promptly paid his fines at the courthouse following the hearing. "Might as well get it done," he commented to the press.

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

Background of the Case

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

She later confessed her anecdote was untrue, but testified during a parliamentary committee investigation that party leaders, such as Singh, had advised her to "continue with the narrative" despite knowing it was a lie.

Khan has since resigned from both the party and parliament. She was penalized S$35,000 for lying 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 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 November court session, Singh's lawyer argued that the lower court had "overlooked key proof" in its original ruling.

The defense also sought to cast doubt on the credibility of Khan and her assistants, who served as witnesses.

When asked why Singh appeared to be "taking no action" to have Khan own up 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, maintained that Singh's lack of action, alongside other evidence, proved he never intended for Khan to tell the truth.

Broader Context

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

Observers have previously accused Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to pursue its political opponents—allegations that the government have consistently denied.

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