🔗 Share this article

In a major court decision, Singapore's main political rival Pritam Singh has failed in his challenge against a conviction of lying to a legislative panel.

Earlier this year, Singh was ordered to pay S$14,000 for two charges connected with 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 ruled that the evidence presented justified Singh's conviction.

Reaction from the Accused

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

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

Notwithstanding the verdict, Singh keeps his seat in parliament and affirmed his commitment to continue serving Singaporeans together with his party members.

The Underlying Saga

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

She later confessed her account was untrue, but testified during a parliamentary committee investigation that party leaders, such as Singh, had instructed 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 penalized S$35,000 for perjury 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 clarify her lie.

Singh, who maintained his innocence during the entire proceedings, argued that he had wanted to allow Khan space to handle what was a delicate issue.

Points Contested

During the November court session, Singh's legal counsel argued that the initial court had "overlooked key proof" in its original ruling.

The defense also sought to cast doubt on the reliability 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 after learning of her lie, his lawyer explained that he had other urgent professional and personal matters to manage.

The prosecution, however, maintained that Singh's inaction, coupled with other evidence, demonstrated he never intended for Khan to tell the truth.

Wider Implications

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

Critics have in the past alleged Singapore's government of using the judiciary to pursue its rivals—charges that the government have always rejected.

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