🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal ruling, Singapore's opposition leader Pritam Singh has failed in his challenge against a guilty verdict of providing false statements to a parliamentary committee.

Earlier this year, Singh was fined S$14,000 for two offenses related to 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 judge declared that the evidence presented upheld Singh's guilty verdict.

Reaction from the Accused

Singh, who leads the main opposition Workers' Party, expressed that he was "disappointed" with the ruling but accepted it "completely and unequivocally".

He settled 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 stated his commitment to keep working for Singaporeans alongside his colleagues.

Background of the Case

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

She later admitted her account was fabricated, but testified during a official inquiry that party leaders, such as 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 lying 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 clarify her lie.

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

The Appeal Arguments

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 asked why Singh appeared to be "doing nothing" to have Khan own up in the weeks following his discovery of her lie, his lawyer explained 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 current opposition parliamentarian.

Observers have in the past alleged Singapore's government of leveraging the courts 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.