🔗 Share this article

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

In February, Singh was fined S$14,000 for two offenses connected with his handling of former lawmaker Raeesah Khan, who had confessed to lying in parliament.

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

Leader's Response

Singh, who leads the main opposition Workers' Party, expressed that he was "disheartened" with the ruling but acknowledged it "fully and without reservation".

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 keeps his seat in parliament and affirmed 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 sexual assault victim.

She later admitted her anecdote was fabricated, but stated during a parliamentary committee investigation that party leaders, including Singh, had instructed 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.

Judicial Reasoning

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

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

Points Contested

During the appeal hearing, Singh's lawyer contended that the lower court had "ignored crucial pieces of evidence" in its original ruling.

The defense also attempted to question the credibility of Khan and her aides, who provided testimony.

When questioned why Singh appeared to be "doing nothing" 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 lack of action, coupled with other evidence, demonstrated he never intended for Khan to tell the truth.

Broader Context

Singh's case is significant as one of the very few criminal convictions against a current opposition parliamentarian.

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

The Workers' Party is the sole rival group in Singapore's present legislature, where it occupies 12 out of 99 seats.