🔗 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 parliamentary committee.

Earlier this year, Singh was fined 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 ruled that the evidence presented supported Singh's conviction.

Leader's Response

Singh, who leads the main political opposition, expressed that he was "disappointed" with the ruling 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 remarked to reporters.

Notwithstanding the verdict, Singh retains his seat in parliament and stated his intention to keep working for Singaporeans alongside his party members.

Background of the Case

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

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

Khan has since stepped down from both the party and parliament. She was penalized S$35,000 for lying and abusing her parliamentary privilege.

Judicial Reasoning

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

Singh, who maintained his innocence throughout the trial, argued that he had wanted to allow Khan space to handle what was a sensitive issue.

Points Contested

During the November court session, Singh's legal counsel argued that the lower court had "overlooked key proof" in its original ruling.

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 "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 state's attorneys, however, maintained that Singh's inaction, alongside 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 current opposition parliamentarian.

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

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