🔗 Share this article

In a notable court decision, Singapore's opposition leader Pritam Singh has lost his appeal against a guilty verdict of providing false statements to a legislative panel.

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

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

Reaction from the Accused

Singh, who leads the main political opposition, expressed that he was "disappointed" with the ruling but accepted 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 parliamentary seat and affirmed his intention to continue serving Singaporeans alongside his colleagues.

The Underlying Saga

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 parliamentary committee investigation that party leaders, such as Singh, had advised her to "stick to the story" despite knowing it was a lie.

Khan has since resigned 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 ruled that Singh's actions were "highly suggestive" that he did not want Khan to clarify her lie.

Singh, who maintained his innocence throughout the trial, countered that he had wanted to give Khan time to deal with what was a sensitive issue.

Points Contested

During the appeal hearing, Singh's lawyer contended 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 assistants, who provided testimony.

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 prosecution, however, argued that Singh's lack of action, alongside other evidence, demonstrated he never intended for 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 previously accused Singapore's government of using the judiciary to pursue its rivals—charges that authorities have consistently denied.

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