🔗 Share this article

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

In February, Singh was ordered to pay S$14,000 for two offenses 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 conviction.

Reaction from the Accused

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

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

Despite the conviction, Singh keeps his parliamentary seat and affirmed his intention to keep working for Singaporeans together with his colleagues.

The Underlying Saga

The controversy originated in 2021 when Raeesah Khan asserted in parliament that she had seen 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 "continue with the narrative" despite knowing it was a lie.

Khan has since stepped down 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 correct the falsehood.

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

The Appeal Arguments

During the November court session, Singh's lawyer contended that the initial court had "overlooked key proof" 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 "taking no action" to have Khan own up in the weeks following his discovery of her lie, his lawyer explained that he had other pressing commitments to manage.

The state's attorneys, however, maintained that Singh's inaction, alongside other evidence, proved he never intended for Khan to tell the truth.

Wider Implications

Singh's case is notable as one of the very few criminal convictions against a current opposition parliamentarian.

Critics have in the past alleged Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to target its rivals—charges 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.