🔗 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.

Earlier this year, Singh was fined 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 packed public gallery on Friday, the judge stated that the evidence presented supported Singh's guilty verdict.

Reaction from the Accused

Singh, who heads the main political opposition, expressed that he was "disappointed" with the ruling but acknowledged it "fully and without reservation".

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

Notwithstanding the verdict, Singh retains his seat in parliament and stated his commitment to continue serving Singaporeans alongside his party members.

The Underlying Saga

The entire episode began in 2021 when Raeesah Khan claimed in parliament that she had seen police act inappropriately towards a survivor.

She later confessed her account was fabricated, but stated during a parliamentary committee investigation 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 misusing her legislative immunity.

Court's Rationale

In February, the court ruled that Singh's actions were "highly suggestive" that he did not want Khan to correct the falsehood.

Singh, who maintained his innocence throughout the trial, countered that he had wanted to give Khan time to handle what was a delicate issue.

Points Contested

During the appeal hearing, Singh's lawyer argued that the initial court had "overlooked key proof" in its initial judgment.

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

When asked why Singh appeared to be "taking no action" 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 attend to.

The prosecution, however, maintained that Singh's inaction, alongside other evidence, proved he never intended for Khan to come clean.

Broader Context

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

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

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