🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal ruling, Singapore's opposition leader 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 offenses related to 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 judge declared that the evidence presented upheld Singh's guilty verdict.

Leader's Response

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

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

Notwithstanding the verdict, Singh keeps his parliamentary seat and stated his commitment to keep working for Singaporeans alongside his party members.

Background of the Case

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

She later admitted her account was untrue, but testified during a parliamentary committee investigation that party leaders, such as Singh, had advised 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 ruled that Singh's actions were "strongly indicative" that he did not want Khan to correct the falsehood.

Singh, who maintained his innocence during the entire proceedings, argued that he had wanted to give Khan time to deal with what was a sensitive issue.

The Appeal Arguments

During the appeal hearing, Singh's legal counsel argued that the initial court had "overlooked key proof" in its original ruling.

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 following his discovery of her lie, his lawyer explained that he had other pressing commitments to manage.

The prosecution, however, maintained that Singh's lack of action, coupled with other evidence, proved he never wanted Khan to tell the truth.

Broader Context

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

Critics have in the past alleged Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to pursue its political opponents—allegations that the government have always rejected.

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