🔗 Share this article

In a significant court decision, 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 handling 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 judge ruled 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 "disheartened" with the decision but acknowledged it "completely and unequivocally".

He settled his fines at the courthouse after the hearing. "Might as well get it done," he remarked to the press.

Notwithstanding the verdict, Singh keeps his seat in parliament and stated his intention to keep working for Singaporeans together with his colleagues.

Background of the Case

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

She later admitted her account was untrue, but stated during a official inquiry that party leaders, such as Singh, had instructed her to "stick to the story" even though they were aware it was a lie.

Khan has since resigned from both the party and parliament. She was penalized S$35,000 for perjury and misusing her legislative immunity.

Judicial Reasoning

In February, the court determined that Singh's actions were "highly suggestive" that he did not want Khan to clarify her lie.

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

Points Contested

During the November court session, 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 "doing nothing" 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 state's attorneys, however, argued that Singh's inaction, coupled with other evidence, demonstrated he never wanted Khan to come clean.

Broader Context

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

Observers have previously accused Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to target its political opponents—allegations that the government have consistently denied.

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