🔗 Share this article

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

Earlier this year, Singh was ordered to pay S$14,000 for two offenses related to his handling of former lawmaker Raeesah Khan, who had confessed to lying in parliament.

During a brief hearing before a packed public gallery on Friday, the presiding judge declared that the evidence presented justified Singh's conviction.

Leader's Response

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

He settled his fines at the court complex after the hearing. "It's best to settle this now," he remarked to the press.

Notwithstanding the verdict, Singh keeps his parliamentary seat and affirmed his commitment to keep working for Singaporeans alongside his colleagues.

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 confessed her anecdote was untrue, but stated during a parliamentary committee investigation that party leaders, including Singh, had advised 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 lying and misusing her legislative immunity.

Court's Rationale

In February, the court ruled that Singh's actions were "strongly indicative" that he did not want Khan to clarify her lie.

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 appeal hearing, Singh's legal counsel contended that the lower court had "ignored crucial pieces of evidence" in its initial judgment.

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 confess in the weeks after learning of her lie, his lawyer explained that he had other urgent professional and personal matters to manage.

The prosecution, however, argued that Singh's lack of action, alongside other evidence, proved he never wanted 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 previously accused Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to target its political opponents—charges that the government have consistently denied.

The Workers' Party is the sole rival group in Singapore's current parliament, where it holds 12 out of 99 seats.