🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal ruling, Singapore's main political rival Pritam Singh has lost his appeal against a guilty verdict of providing false statements to a parliamentary committee.

Earlier this year, Singh was fined S$14,000 for two charges connected with his handling of former lawmaker Raeesah Khan, who had admitted to giving false testimony in parliament.

During a brief hearing before a full public gallery on Friday, the judge stated that the evidence presented supported Singh's guilty verdict.

Reaction from the Accused

Singh, who heads the main opposition Workers' Party, expressed that he was "disheartened" with the ruling but acknowledged it "completely and unequivocally".

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

Despite the conviction, Singh keeps his seat in parliament and affirmed his commitment to continue serving Singaporeans together with his party members.

Background of the Case

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

She later confessed her anecdote was fabricated, but stated during a parliamentary committee investigation that party leaders, including 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.

Judicial Reasoning

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

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

The Appeal Arguments

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

The defense also sought to cast doubt on the credibility of Khan and her aides, who served as witnesses.

When questioned why Singh appeared to be "taking no action" 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 attend to.

The state's attorneys, however, argued that Singh's inaction, coupled with other evidence, proved he never intended for Khan to tell the truth.

Broader Context

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

Critics have previously accused Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to pursue its rivals—allegations that the government have consistently denied.

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