🔗 Share this article

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

In February, Singh was ordered to pay 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 presiding judge ruled that the evidence presented upheld Singh's guilty verdict.

Leader's Response

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

He promptly paid his fines at the courthouse after the hearing. "It's best to settle this now," he commented to reporters.

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

The Underlying Saga

The controversy originated in 2021 when Raeesah Khan claimed in parliament that she had seen police act inappropriately towards a sexual assault victim.

She later admitted her anecdote was fabricated, 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 fined S$35,000 for perjury and misusing her legislative immunity.

Court's Rationale

In February, the court determined 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, 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 lawyer contended that the initial 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 served as witnesses.

When questioned why Singh appeared to be "doing nothing" to have Khan own up in the weeks after learning of her lie, his lawyer stated that he had other pressing commitments to manage.

The prosecution, however, maintained that Singh's inaction, alongside other evidence, proved he never intended for Khan to tell the truth.

Wider Implications

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 target its rivals—charges that the government have always rejected.

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