🔗 Share this article

In a significant court decision, Singapore's main political rival Pritam Singh has failed in his challenge against a guilty verdict of providing false statements to a legislative panel.

Earlier this year, Singh was fined S$14,000 for two charges related to his management 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 judge ruled that the evidence presented justified Singh's guilty verdict.

Reaction from the Accused

Singh, who leads the main opposition Workers' Party, expressed that he was "disheartened" with the ruling 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 the press.

Despite the conviction, Singh retains his seat in parliament and affirmed his commitment to continue serving Singaporeans together with his colleagues.

Background of the Case

The entire episode originated in 2021 when Raeesah Khan asserted in parliament that she had witnessed police misbehave towards a sexual assault victim.

She later confessed her anecdote was fabricated, but stated during a parliamentary committee investigation that party leaders, including Singh, had instructed her to "stick to the story" even though they were aware it was a lie.

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

Judicial Reasoning

In February, the court ruled that Singh's actions were "strongly indicative" that he did not want Khan to clarify her lie.

Singh, who maintained his innocence during the entire proceedings, argued that he had wanted to give Khan time to deal with what was a sensitive issue.

The Appeal Arguments

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

The defense also sought to cast doubt on the reliability of Khan and her aides, who served as witnesses.

When asked why Singh appeared to be "doing nothing" 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 prosecution, however, argued that Singh's inaction, coupled with other evidence, demonstrated he never wanted Khan to tell the truth.

Broader Context

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

Observers have in the past alleged Singapore's government of using the judiciary to target its rivals—allegations that authorities have consistently denied.

The Workers' Party is the only opposition party in Singapore's current parliament, where it holds 12 out of 99 seats.