🔗 Share this article

In a notable 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 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 full public gallery on Friday, the 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 accepted it "fully and without reservation".

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

Despite the conviction, Singh keeps his seat in parliament and affirmed his commitment to keep working for Singaporeans alongside his party members.

The Underlying Saga

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

She later admitted her account was untrue, but stated during a parliamentary committee investigation that party leaders, including Singh, had instructed her to "stick to the story" despite knowing it was a lie.

Khan has since stepped down 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 during the entire proceedings, argued that he had wanted to allow Khan space to handle what was a sensitive issue.

The Appeal Arguments

During the November court session, Singh's lawyer argued 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 confess in the weeks after learning of her lie, his lawyer stated that he had other pressing commitments to attend to.

The state's attorneys, however, maintained that Singh's inaction, alongside other evidence, demonstrated he never intended for Khan to tell the truth.

Wider Implications

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

Observers have previously accused Singapore's government of using the judiciary 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.