🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal ruling, Singapore's opposition leader Pritam Singh has lost his appeal against a conviction of lying to a parliamentary committee.

In February, Singh was fined S$14,000 for two offenses connected with his handling of former lawmaker Raeesah Khan, who had admitted to giving false testimony in parliament.

During a brief hearing before a packed public gallery on Friday, the presiding judge ruled that the evidence presented justified Singh's guilty verdict.

Leader's Response

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

He settled his fines at the court complex following the hearing. "It's best to settle this now," he commented to reporters.

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

Background of the Case

The entire episode originated in 2021 when Raeesah Khan claimed in parliament that she had seen police act inappropriately towards a sexual assault victim.

She later admitted her anecdote was fabricated, but testified during a official inquiry that party leaders, such as Singh, had advised her to "continue with the narrative" 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.

Court's Rationale

In February, the court determined that Singh's actions were "highly suggestive" 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 give Khan time to handle what was a delicate issue.

The Appeal Arguments

During the appeal hearing, Singh's lawyer contended that the initial court had "ignored crucial pieces of evidence" 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 stated that he had other urgent professional and personal matters to attend to.

The prosecution, however, argued that Singh's inaction, coupled with other evidence, demonstrated 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 previously accused Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to target its rivals—allegations that the government have always rejected.

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