🔗 Share this article

In a significant court decision, Singapore's main political rival Pritam Singh has lost his appeal against a guilty verdict of providing false statements to a legislative panel.

Earlier this year, Singh was ordered to pay S$14,000 for two offenses connected with his management of former lawmaker Raeesah Khan, who had confessed to lying in parliament.

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

Leader's Response

Singh, who heads the main political opposition, expressed that he was "disappointed" with the ruling but acknowledged it "completely and unequivocally".

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

Notwithstanding the verdict, Singh keeps his seat in parliament and affirmed his commitment to continue serving Singaporeans together with his colleagues.

Background of the Case

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

She later admitted her account was fabricated, but stated during a parliamentary committee investigation that party leaders, including Singh, had instructed her to "stick to the story" despite knowing 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 ruled that Singh's actions were "strongly indicative" that he did not want Khan to clarify her lie.

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

Points Contested

During the appeal hearing, Singh's lawyer contended 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 assistants, who provided testimony.

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 pressing commitments to attend to.

The state's attorneys, however, argued that Singh's inaction, 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.

Observers have previously accused Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to pursue its political opponents—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.