🔗 Share this article

In a significant court decision, Singapore's opposition leader 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 connected with 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 stated that the evidence presented justified Singh's guilty verdict.

Leader's Response

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

He promptly paid his fines at the courthouse following the hearing. "Might as well get it done," he commented to the press.

Despite the conviction, Singh keeps his parliamentary seat and affirmed his intention to continue serving Singaporeans together with his colleagues.

Background of the Case

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

She later confessed her account was untrue, but testified during a official inquiry 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 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 protested his innocence throughout the trial, argued that he had wanted to allow Khan space to deal with what was a delicate issue.

The Appeal Arguments

During the appeal hearing, Singh's legal counsel contended that the initial court had "overlooked key proof" in its original ruling.

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

When questioned why Singh appeared to be "doing nothing" to have Khan confess in the weeks following his discovery of her lie, his lawyer explained that he had other urgent professional and personal matters to manage.

The state's attorneys, however, argued that Singh's lack of action, alongside other evidence, proved he never intended for Khan to come clean.

Broader Context

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

Observers have in the past alleged Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to pursue its rivals—charges that authorities have always rejected.

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