🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal ruling, Singapore's main political rival Pritam Singh has lost his appeal against a guilty verdict of providing false statements to a parliamentary committee.

Earlier this year, Singh was fined S$14,000 for two offenses connected with 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 ruled that the evidence presented upheld Singh's guilty verdict.

Reaction from the Accused

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

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

Despite the conviction, Singh keeps his seat in parliament and affirmed his commitment to continue serving Singaporeans together with his party members.

Background of the Case

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

She later confessed her anecdote was fabricated, but testified during a parliamentary committee investigation that party leaders, such as Singh, had advised her to "stick to the story" despite knowing it was a lie.

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

Judicial Reasoning

In February, the court determined 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, 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 lower court had "ignored crucial pieces of evidence" in its initial judgment.

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

When asked why Singh appeared to be "doing nothing" to have Khan own up in the weeks following his discovery of her lie, his lawyer explained that he had other urgent professional and personal matters to attend to.

The prosecution, however, maintained that Singh's inaction, coupled with other evidence, proved he never wanted Khan to come clean.

Wider Implications

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

Critics have previously accused Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to target its rivals—charges that the government have consistently denied.

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