🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal ruling, Singapore's main political rival Pritam Singh has lost his appeal against a conviction of lying 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 stated that the evidence presented upheld Singh's conviction.

Reaction from the Accused

Singh, who leads the main political opposition, expressed that he was "disheartened" with the decision but accepted it "fully and without reservation".

He promptly paid his fines at the court complex after the hearing. "It's best to settle this now," he commented to the press.

Despite the conviction, Singh keeps his seat in parliament and affirmed his commitment to keep working for Singaporeans alongside his colleagues.

The Underlying Saga

The entire episode originated in 2021 when Raeesah Khan claimed in parliament that she had seen police misbehave towards a sexual assault victim.

She later confessed her anecdote was fabricated, but testified during a parliamentary committee investigation that party leaders, such as Singh, had instructed her to "stick to the story" despite knowing 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 "strongly indicative" 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 give Khan time to deal with what was a delicate issue.

Points Contested

During the appeal hearing, Singh's legal counsel argued that the initial court had "ignored crucial pieces of evidence" in its original ruling.

The defense also sought to cast doubt on the reliability of Khan and her aides, who provided testimony.

When questioned why Singh appeared to be "taking no action" to have Khan confess in the weeks following his discovery of her lie, his lawyer stated that he had other pressing commitments to manage.

The prosecution, however, argued that Singh's lack of action, alongside other evidence, demonstrated he never wanted Khan to tell the truth.

Broader Context

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

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

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