🔗 Share this article

In a notable court decision, Singapore's main political rival Pritam Singh has failed in his challenge against a guilty verdict of providing false statements 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 confessed to lying in parliament.

During a short hearing before a packed public gallery on Friday, the presiding judge declared that the evidence presented upheld Singh's guilty verdict.

Leader's Response

Singh, who heads the main opposition Workers' Party, expressed that he was "disappointed" with the ruling but acknowledged it "fully and without reservation".

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

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

The Underlying Saga

The controversy began 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 testified during a official inquiry that party leaders, including 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 fined S$35,000 for lying and abusing her parliamentary privilege.

Judicial Reasoning

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

Singh, who maintained his innocence throughout the trial, countered that he had wanted to give Khan time to deal with what was a delicate issue.

The Appeal Arguments

During the November court session, Singh's legal counsel argued that the lower 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 asked why Singh appeared to be "doing nothing" to have Khan own up in the weeks after learning of her lie, his lawyer stated that he had other pressing commitments to attend to.

The state's attorneys, however, maintained that Singh's lack of action, coupled with 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 sitting opposition lawmaker.

Critics have in the past alleged Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to target its political opponents—allegations that authorities have consistently denied.

The Workers' Party is the only opposition party in Singapore's present legislature, where it occupies 12 out of 99 seats.