🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal ruling, Singapore's opposition leader Pritam Singh has failed in his challenge against a guilty verdict of lying to a legislative panel.

Earlier this year, Singh was ordered to pay S$14,000 for two charges 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 judge stated that the evidence presented justified Singh's guilty verdict.

Reaction from the Accused

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

He promptly paid his fines at the courthouse following the hearing. "It's best to settle this now," he commented to reporters.

Notwithstanding the verdict, Singh retains his parliamentary seat and stated his intention to keep working for Singaporeans together with his colleagues.

The Underlying Saga

The controversy originated in 2021 when Raeesah Khan claimed in parliament that she had seen police misbehave towards a sexual assault victim.

She later admitted her anecdote was fabricated, but testified during a parliamentary committee investigation that party leaders, such as 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.

Judicial Reasoning

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 handle what was a delicate issue.

Points Contested

During the November court session, Singh's legal counsel contended that the initial court had "overlooked key proof" 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 own up in the weeks after learning of her lie, his lawyer explained that he had other urgent professional and personal matters to attend to.

The state's attorneys, however, argued that Singh's inaction, alongside other evidence, proved he never wanted Khan to tell the truth.

Wider Implications

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

Critics have in the past alleged Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to pursue its political opponents—charges that authorities have consistently denied.

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