🔗 Share this article

In a major court decision, Singapore's opposition leader Pritam Singh has failed in his challenge against a conviction of lying to a parliamentary committee.

In February, Singh was ordered to pay S$14,000 for two offenses related to 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 judge ruled 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 accepted it "fully and without reservation".

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

Notwithstanding the verdict, Singh keeps his seat in parliament and affirmed his commitment to keep working for Singaporeans alongside his colleagues.

Background of the Case

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

She later confessed her account 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 stepped down from both the party and parliament. She was fined 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 clarify her lie.

Singh, who protested his innocence throughout the trial, argued that he had wanted to give Khan time to handle what was a delicate issue.

Points Contested

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

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

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 pressing commitments to manage.

The state's attorneys, however, argued 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 rare criminal convictions against a sitting opposition lawmaker.

Critics have in the past alleged Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to target 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.