🔗 Share this article

In a notable court decision, Singapore's opposition leader Pritam Singh has failed in his challenge against a conviction of providing false statements to a parliamentary committee.

Earlier this year, Singh was fined S$14,000 for two charges connected with his management of former lawmaker Raeesah Khan, who had confessed to lying in parliament.

During a brief hearing before a full public gallery on Friday, the presiding judge stated that the evidence presented upheld Singh's conviction.

Reaction from the Accused

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

He settled his fines at the court complex after the hearing. "It's best to settle this now," he remarked to the press.

Notwithstanding the verdict, Singh retains his seat in parliament and stated his intention to continue serving Singaporeans together with his colleagues.

Background of the Case

The controversy originated in 2021 when Raeesah Khan asserted in parliament that she had witnessed police act inappropriately towards a sexual assault victim.

She later confessed her anecdote was fabricated, but testified during a parliamentary committee investigation that party leaders, including Singh, had advised her to "continue with the narrative" despite knowing it was a lie.

Khan has since stepped down from both the party and parliament. She was fined S$35,000 for perjury and misusing her legislative immunity.

Judicial Reasoning

In February, the court determined that Singh's actions were "highly suggestive" 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 handle what was a sensitive issue.

The Appeal Arguments

During the November court session, Singh's lawyer argued that the lower court had "ignored crucial pieces of evidence" in its initial judgment.

The defense also sought to cast doubt on the credibility of Khan and her aides, who provided testimony.

When asked why Singh appeared to be "doing nothing" to have Khan confess in the weeks after learning of her lie, his lawyer explained that he had other pressing commitments to attend to.

The prosecution, however, argued that Singh's inaction, alongside other evidence, demonstrated 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.

Critics have previously accused Singapore's government of using the judiciary to pursue its political opponents—charges 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.