🔗 Share this article

In a significant 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 fined S$14,000 for two offenses related to his management of former lawmaker Raeesah Khan, who had admitted to giving false testimony in parliament.

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

Reaction from the Accused

Singh, who heads the main political opposition, expressed that he was "disappointed" with the decision but acknowledged it "fully and without reservation".

He settled his fines at the courthouse after the hearing. "Might as well get it done," he commented to the press.

Notwithstanding the verdict, Singh retains his seat in parliament and stated his intention to continue serving Singaporeans together with his party members.

Background of the Case

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

She later admitted her anecdote was fabricated, 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 fined S$35,000 for lying 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 correct the falsehood.

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

Points Contested

During the appeal hearing, Singh's lawyer contended that the lower court had "ignored crucial pieces of evidence" in its original ruling.

The defense also attempted to question the reliability of Khan and her assistants, 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 stated that he had other pressing commitments to manage.

The prosecution, however, maintained that Singh's inaction, alongside other evidence, demonstrated he never intended for Khan to come clean.

Broader Context

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

Observers have in the past alleged Singapore's government of using the judiciary to target its political opponents—allegations that the government have always rejected.

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