🔗 Share this article

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

In February, Singh was fined S$14,000 for two charges 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 presiding judge stated that the evidence presented supported Singh's conviction.

Leader's Response

Singh, who heads the main political opposition, expressed that he was "disappointed" with the ruling but acknowledged it "completely and unequivocally".

He settled his fines at the court complex following the hearing. "Might as well get it done," he remarked to reporters.

Despite the conviction, Singh retains his parliamentary seat and stated his commitment to keep working for 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 act inappropriately towards a survivor.

She later admitted her account was fabricated, but stated during a official inquiry 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 "strongly indicative" that he did not want Khan to clarify her lie.

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

The Appeal Arguments

During the appeal hearing, Singh's lawyer argued that the initial court had "overlooked key proof" in its original ruling.

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

When questioned why Singh appeared to be "taking no action" to have Khan own up 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, maintained that Singh's inaction, alongside other evidence, demonstrated he never intended for Khan to come clean.

Broader Context

Singh's case is significant as one of the rare 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 authorities have consistently denied.

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