🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal ruling, Singapore's opposition leader Pritam Singh has failed in his challenge against a guilty verdict of lying to a legislative panel.

Earlier this year, Singh was ordered to pay S$14,000 for two offenses connected with his management of former lawmaker Raeesah Khan, who had admitted to giving false testimony in parliament.

During a short hearing before a packed public gallery on Friday, the presiding judge declared that the evidence presented supported Singh's guilty verdict.

Leader's Response

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

He promptly paid his fines at the courthouse following the hearing. "Might as well get it done," he commented to reporters.

Notwithstanding the verdict, Singh retains his seat in parliament and affirmed his intention to keep working for Singaporeans together with his party members.

The Underlying Saga

The entire episode began in 2021 when Raeesah Khan asserted in parliament that she had witnessed police misbehave towards a survivor.

She later confessed her anecdote was untrue, but stated during a parliamentary committee investigation 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 fined S$35,000 for perjury and abusing her parliamentary privilege.

Judicial Reasoning

In February, the court determined that Singh's actions were "strongly indicative" that he did not want Khan to correct the falsehood.

Singh, who protested his innocence throughout the trial, countered that he had wanted to allow Khan space to handle what was a delicate issue.

Points Contested

During the appeal hearing, Singh's legal counsel argued that the initial court had "ignored crucial pieces of evidence" in its original ruling.

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

When asked why Singh appeared to be "taking no action" to have Khan own up in the weeks following his discovery of her lie, his lawyer stated that he had other urgent professional and personal matters to attend to.

The prosecution, however, maintained that Singh's lack of action, alongside other evidence, proved he never wanted Khan to tell the truth.

Wider Implications

Singh's case is significant as one of the rare criminal convictions against a sitting opposition lawmaker.

Critics have previously accused Singapore's government of using the judiciary to target its political opponents—allegations that authorities have consistently denied.

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