🔗 Share this article

In a significant court decision, Singapore's main political rival Pritam Singh has failed in his challenge against a guilty verdict 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 short hearing before a full public gallery on Friday, the presiding judge declared that the evidence presented justified Singh's conviction.

Leader's Response

Singh, who leads the main political opposition, expressed that he was "disheartened" with the decision but acknowledged it "fully and without reservation".

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 seat in parliament and affirmed his commitment to continue serving Singaporeans alongside his colleagues.

Background of the Case

The controversy originated in 2021 when Raeesah Khan claimed in parliament that she had witnessed police act inappropriately towards a survivor.

She later confessed 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" despite knowing it was a lie.

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

Court's Rationale

In February, the court determined that Singh's actions were "strongly indicative" that he did not want Khan to correct the falsehood.

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

Points Contested

During the November court session, Singh's lawyer argued that the lower court had "overlooked key proof" in its original ruling.

The defense also sought to cast doubt on 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 stated 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 intended for Khan to come clean.

Wider Implications

Singh's case is notable as one of the rare criminal convictions against a sitting opposition lawmaker.

Observers have previously accused Singapore's government of using the judiciary to pursue its political opponents—allegations that authorities have consistently denied.

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