🔗 Share this article

In a significant court decision, Singapore's opposition leader Pritam Singh has lost his appeal against a conviction of lying to a legislative panel.

Earlier this year, Singh was ordered to pay S$14,000 for two offenses connected with his handling of former lawmaker Raeesah Khan, who had confessed to lying in parliament.

During a brief hearing before a full public gallery on Friday, the judge ruled that the evidence presented supported Singh's conviction.

Leader's Response

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

He promptly paid his fines at the court complex after the hearing. "Might as well get it done," he remarked to reporters.

Despite the conviction, Singh keeps his seat in parliament and stated his intention to continue serving Singaporeans alongside his party members.

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 admitted her account was fabricated, but testified during a parliamentary committee investigation that party leaders, such as Singh, had instructed 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 lying and abusing her parliamentary privilege.

Judicial Reasoning

In February, the court ruled that Singh's actions were "strongly indicative" 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 deal with what was a delicate issue.

Points Contested

During the November court session, Singh's legal counsel 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 asked 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 urgent professional and personal matters to attend to.

The prosecution, however, argued that Singh's lack of action, coupled with other evidence, proved he never wanted Khan to come clean.

Wider Implications

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

Critics have in the past alleged Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to pursue its rivals—charges that the government have consistently denied.

The Workers' Party is the sole rival group in Singapore's present legislature, where it occupies 12 out of 99 seats.