🔗 Share this article

In a significant court decision, Singapore's opposition leader Pritam Singh has lost his appeal against a guilty verdict of lying 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 admitted to giving false testimony in parliament.

During a brief hearing before a packed public gallery on Friday, the presiding judge ruled that the evidence presented supported 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 promptly paid his fines at the courthouse after the hearing. "It's best to settle this now," he commented to reporters.

Despite the conviction, Singh retains his seat in parliament and stated his intention to continue serving Singaporeans alongside his colleagues.

The Underlying Saga

The controversy originated in 2021 when Raeesah Khan claimed in parliament that she had seen police act inappropriately towards a sexual assault victim.

She later confessed her anecdote was untrue, 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 penalized S$35,000 for perjury and misusing her legislative immunity.

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, argued that he had wanted to allow Khan space to handle what was a sensitive issue.

Points Contested

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

The defense also attempted to question the reliability of Khan and her assistants, who served as witnesses.

When questioned 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 state's attorneys, however, maintained that Singh's inaction, coupled with 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 sitting opposition lawmaker.

Critics have in the past alleged Singapore's government of using the judiciary to pursue its rivals—charges that the government have always rejected.

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