🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal ruling, Singapore's opposition leader 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 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 ruled that the evidence presented upheld 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 court complex after the hearing. "Might as well get it done," he commented to the press.

Despite the conviction, Singh keeps his seat in parliament and affirmed his intention to keep working for Singaporeans alongside his colleagues.

The Underlying Saga

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

She later admitted her anecdote was fabricated, but stated during a parliamentary committee investigation that party leaders, including 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 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, countered that he had wanted to allow Khan space to handle what was a sensitive issue.

The Appeal Arguments

During the November court session, Singh's lawyer contended that the initial court had "overlooked key proof" in its initial judgment.

The defense also sought to cast doubt on the credibility of Khan and her assistants, who served as witnesses.

When asked why Singh appeared to be "taking no action" to have Khan confess in the weeks following his discovery of her lie, his lawyer stated that he had other urgent professional and personal matters to attend to.

The prosecution, however, argued that Singh's inaction, coupled with other evidence, proved he never intended for Khan to tell the truth.

Broader Context

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

Critics have in the past alleged Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to pursue its rivals—allegations that the government have consistently denied.

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