🔗 Share this article

In a major legal ruling, Singapore's opposition leader 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 charges connected with his handling 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 stated that the evidence presented supported Singh's guilty verdict.

Reaction from the Accused

Singh, who leads the main political opposition, expressed that he was "disheartened" with the decision but accepted it "fully and without reservation".

He promptly paid his fines at the court complex after the hearing. "Might as well get it done," he remarked to the press.

Despite the conviction, Singh retains his parliamentary seat and stated his intention to keep working for Singaporeans alongside his colleagues.

Background of the Case

The controversy began in 2021 when Raeesah Khan asserted in parliament that she had seen police act inappropriately towards a sexual assault victim.

She later confessed her account was untrue, but stated 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 resigned from both the party and parliament. She was penalized S$35,000 for perjury and abusing her parliamentary privilege.

Court's Rationale

In February, the court determined 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, argued that he had wanted to allow Khan space to deal with what was a delicate issue.

The Appeal Arguments

During the appeal hearing, Singh's lawyer contended that the initial court had "overlooked key proof" in its original ruling.

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

When questioned why Singh appeared to be "taking no action" to have Khan own up in the weeks after learning of her lie, his lawyer explained that he had other pressing commitments to attend to.

The state's attorneys, however, argued that Singh's lack of action, coupled with other evidence, demonstrated he never wanted 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 using the judiciary to pursue its political opponents—allegations that authorities have always rejected.

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