🔗 Share this article

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

Earlier this year, Singh was fined 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 brief 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 political opposition, expressed that he was "disappointed" with the decision but acknowledged it "completely and unequivocally".

He settled his fines at the courthouse after the hearing. "It's best to settle this now," he commented to the press.

Despite the conviction, Singh keeps his parliamentary seat and affirmed his intention to keep working for Singaporeans together with his party members.

The Underlying Saga

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

She later confessed her account was untrue, but testified during a official inquiry that party leaders, including Singh, had advised 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 fined S$35,000 for perjury and misusing her legislative immunity.

Court's Rationale

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

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

The Appeal Arguments

During the appeal hearing, Singh's legal counsel argued that the initial court had "overlooked key proof" in its initial judgment.

The defense also attempted to question the reliability 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 after learning of her lie, his lawyer explained 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, proved he never wanted Khan to tell the truth.

Wider Implications

Singh's case is significant as one of the very few criminal convictions against a current opposition parliamentarian.

Observers have previously accused Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to pursue its political opponents—charges that the government have always rejected.

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