🔗 Share this article

In a significant court decision, Singapore's main political rival 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 connected with 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 ruled that the evidence presented upheld Singh's guilty verdict.

Leader's Response

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

He settled his fines at the courthouse after the hearing. "Might as well get it done," he remarked to reporters.

Notwithstanding the verdict, Singh retains his parliamentary seat and stated his intention to keep working for Singaporeans together with his party members.

The Underlying Saga

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

She later admitted her account was untrue, but testified during a official inquiry that party leaders, such as 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.

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, argued that he had wanted to give Khan time to handle what was a delicate issue.

The Appeal Arguments

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

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

When questioned why Singh appeared to be "taking no action" to have Khan own up in the weeks following his discovery 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 wanted Khan to come clean.

Broader Context

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

Critics have previously accused Singapore's government of using the judiciary to target its rivals—charges that the government have always rejected.

The Workers' Party is the sole rival group in Singapore's current parliament, where it holds 12 out of 99 seats.