🔗 Share this article

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

In February, Singh was ordered to pay S$14,000 for two offenses related to his handling of former lawmaker Raeesah Khan, who had admitted to giving false testimony in parliament.

During a short hearing before a full public gallery on Friday, the judge declared that the evidence presented upheld Singh's conviction.

Reaction from the Accused

Singh, who heads the main opposition Workers' Party, expressed that he was "disappointed" with the ruling but accepted it "fully and without reservation".

He settled his fines at the court complex 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 intention to keep working for Singaporeans together with his colleagues.

The Underlying Saga

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

She later confessed her account was fabricated, but stated during a official inquiry that party leaders, such as Singh, had advised her to "continue with the narrative" 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 misusing her legislative immunity.

Court's Rationale

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

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

The Appeal Arguments

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

The defense also attempted to question the credibility of Khan and her assistants, who provided testimony.

When asked why Singh appeared to be "taking no action" to have Khan own up in the weeks after learning of her lie, his lawyer stated that he had other pressing commitments to manage.

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

Wider Implications

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

Critics have in the past alleged Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to target its rivals—charges that authorities have consistently denied.

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