🔗 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.

Earlier this year, Singh was fined S$14,000 for two charges related to his management 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 declared that the evidence presented justified Singh's guilty verdict.

Reaction from the Accused

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

He settled 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 affirmed his commitment to continue serving Singaporeans alongside his colleagues.

Background of the Case

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

She later confessed her account was untrue, but stated 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 misusing her legislative immunity.

Judicial Reasoning

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

Singh, who maintained his innocence throughout the trial, countered that he had wanted to give Khan time to deal with what was a sensitive issue.

Points Contested

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

The defense also sought to cast doubt on the credibility of Khan and her assistants, who provided testimony.

When asked 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 state's attorneys, however, maintained that Singh's lack of action, alongside other evidence, demonstrated he never wanted Khan to come clean.

Broader Context

Singh's case is significant as one of the rare criminal convictions against a sitting opposition lawmaker.

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 present legislature, where it holds 12 out of 99 seats.