🔗 Share this article

In a major legal ruling, Singapore's opposition leader Pritam Singh has failed in his challenge against a conviction of lying to a legislative panel.

Earlier this year, Singh was ordered to pay S$14,000 for two charges connected with his management 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 declared that the evidence presented upheld Singh's conviction.

Reaction from the Accused

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

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

Notwithstanding the verdict, Singh keeps his seat in parliament and stated his intention to continue serving Singaporeans together with his party members.

Background of the Case

The controversy originated in 2021 when Raeesah Khan asserted in parliament that she had witnessed police misbehave towards a survivor.

She later admitted her anecdote was untrue, but testified during a official inquiry that party leaders, including Singh, had advised her to "continue with the narrative" even though they were aware it was a lie.

Khan has since resigned from both the party and parliament. She was fined S$35,000 for lying and abusing her parliamentary privilege.

Court's Rationale

In February, the court ruled that Singh's actions were "strongly indicative" that he did not want Khan to clarify her lie.

Singh, who protested his innocence during the entire proceedings, countered that he had wanted to allow Khan space to handle what was a delicate issue.

The Appeal Arguments

During the November court session, 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 aides, 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 explained that he had other pressing commitments to attend to.

The prosecution, however, maintained that Singh's inaction, alongside 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.

Observers have previously accused Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to target its rivals—allegations that authorities have always rejected.

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