🔗 Share this article

In a significant court decision, Singapore's main political rival Pritam Singh has lost his appeal against a guilty verdict of providing false statements to a legislative panel.

In February, Singh was ordered to pay S$14,000 for two offenses related to his management 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 supported Singh's conviction.

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

Despite the conviction, Singh retains his parliamentary seat and affirmed his intention to continue serving Singaporeans together with his colleagues.

Background of the Case

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

She later admitted her anecdote 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 resigned from both the party and parliament. She was fined S$35,000 for lying 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 maintained his innocence throughout the trial, 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 "ignored crucial pieces of evidence" 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 confess in the weeks following his discovery of her lie, his lawyer stated that he had other pressing commitments to manage.

The state's attorneys, however, maintained that Singh's lack of action, alongside other evidence, proved he never wanted Khan to tell the truth.

Wider Implications

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

Observers have previously accused Singapore's government of using the judiciary to pursue its rivals—charges that the government have always rejected.

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