🔗 Share this article

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

In February, Singh was fined S$14,000 for two offenses related to his management of former lawmaker Raeesah Khan, who had confessed to lying in parliament.

During a brief hearing before a full public gallery on Friday, the judge ruled that the evidence presented justified 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 acknowledged it "fully and without reservation".

He promptly paid his fines at the court complex following the hearing. "It's best to settle this now," he remarked to reporters.

Notwithstanding the verdict, Singh retains his parliamentary seat and stated his commitment to continue serving Singaporeans alongside his colleagues.

The Underlying Saga

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

She later confessed her anecdote was untrue, but testified during a official inquiry that party leaders, such as 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 penalized S$35,000 for perjury and misusing her legislative immunity.

Court's Rationale

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

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

The Appeal Arguments

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

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

When asked why Singh appeared to be "doing nothing" to have Khan confess in the weeks following his discovery of her lie, his lawyer explained that he had other urgent professional and personal matters to manage.

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

Wider Implications

Singh's case is significant 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 rivals—charges that the government have always rejected.

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