🔗 Share this article

In a major legal ruling, Singapore's opposition leader Pritam Singh has failed in his challenge against a guilty verdict of lying to a legislative panel.

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

During a brief hearing before a full public gallery on Friday, the judge ruled that the evidence presented supported Singh's guilty verdict.

Reaction from the Accused

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

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

Despite the conviction, Singh retains his parliamentary seat and stated his commitment to keep working for Singaporeans together with his party members.

The Underlying Saga

The entire episode began in 2021 when Raeesah Khan asserted in parliament that she had witnessed police act inappropriately towards a survivor.

She later confessed her account was fabricated, but stated during a parliamentary committee investigation that party leaders, including 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 lying and abusing her parliamentary privilege.

Judicial Reasoning

In February, the court ruled that Singh's actions were "strongly indicative" 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 give Khan time to deal with what was a delicate issue.

The Appeal Arguments

During the appeal hearing, Singh's lawyer 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 "taking no action" to have Khan confess in the weeks after learning of her lie, his lawyer stated that he had other urgent professional and personal matters to attend to.

The state's attorneys, however, maintained that Singh's inaction, coupled with other evidence, demonstrated 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 in the past alleged Singapore's government of using the judiciary to pursue its political opponents—charges that authorities have consistently denied.

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