🔗 Share this article

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

In February, Singh was ordered to pay S$14,000 for two charges related to his handling of former lawmaker Raeesah Khan, who had admitted to giving false testimony in parliament.

During a brief hearing before a packed public gallery on Friday, the judge stated that the evidence presented supported Singh's conviction.

Reaction from the Accused

Singh, who heads the main opposition Workers' Party, expressed that he was "disappointed" with the decision but acknowledged it "completely and unequivocally".

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

Despite the conviction, Singh keeps his parliamentary seat and stated his intention to continue serving Singaporeans alongside his party members.

The Underlying Saga

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

She later confessed her anecdote was untrue, but testified during a parliamentary committee investigation that party leaders, including Singh, had instructed her to "stick to the story" even though they were aware it was a lie.

Khan has since resigned from both the party and parliament. She was fined S$35,000 for perjury and misusing her legislative immunity.

Court's Rationale

In February, the court ruled that Singh's actions were "highly suggestive" that he did not want Khan to clarify her lie.

Singh, who protested his innocence throughout the trial, 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 lower court had "ignored crucial pieces of evidence" in its original ruling.

The defense also attempted to question the credibility of Khan and her assistants, who provided testimony.

When questioned 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 prosecution, however, maintained that Singh's lack of action, coupled with other evidence, demonstrated he never wanted Khan to tell the truth.

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 rivals—charges that authorities have consistently denied.

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