🔗 Share this article

In a notable court decision, Singapore's main political rival Pritam Singh has lost his appeal against a conviction of providing false statements to a parliamentary committee.

In February, 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 full public gallery on Friday, the judge stated that the evidence presented supported Singh's conviction.

Leader's Response

Singh, who heads the main political opposition, expressed that he was "disheartened" with the decision but acknowledged it "completely and unequivocally".

He promptly paid his fines at the courthouse following the hearing. "It's best to settle this now," he remarked to reporters.

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

Background of the Case

The controversy began in 2021 when Raeesah Khan claimed in parliament that she had witnessed police act inappropriately towards a survivor.

She later confessed her anecdote was untrue, but testified during a official inquiry that party leaders, including Singh, had instructed her to "continue with the narrative" even though they were aware it was a lie.

Khan has since stepped down from both the party and parliament. She was penalized S$35,000 for perjury and abusing her parliamentary privilege.

Court's Rationale

In February, the court ruled 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 allow Khan space to handle what was a sensitive issue.

Points Contested

During the November court session, Singh's lawyer contended that the lower court had "overlooked key proof" in its initial judgment.

The defense also attempted to question the reliability of Khan and her aides, who served as witnesses.

When questioned 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 urgent professional and personal matters to attend to.

The state's attorneys, however, maintained that Singh's lack of action, alongside other evidence, proved he never wanted 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 in the past alleged Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to target its rivals—charges that the government have always rejected.

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