🔗 Share this article

In a significant court decision, Singapore's main political rival Pritam Singh has failed in his challenge against a guilty verdict of lying to a parliamentary committee.

Earlier this year, Singh was fined S$14,000 for two charges related to his management of former lawmaker Raeesah Khan, who had confessed to lying in parliament.

During a short hearing before a packed public gallery on Friday, the judge stated that the evidence presented upheld Singh's guilty verdict.

Leader's Response

Singh, who heads the main political opposition, expressed that he was "disappointed" with the ruling 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 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 originated in 2021 when Raeesah Khan claimed in parliament that she had witnessed police misbehave towards a survivor.

She later confessed her anecdote was fabricated, but testified during a parliamentary committee investigation that party leaders, including Singh, had instructed 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 fined S$35,000 for lying and abusing her parliamentary privilege.

Judicial Reasoning

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

Singh, who maintained 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 lower court had "overlooked key proof" in its original ruling.

The defense also sought to cast doubt on the credibility of Khan and her aides, who served as witnesses.

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 pressing commitments to manage.

The prosecution, however, maintained that Singh's inaction, coupled with other evidence, demonstrated he never wanted Khan to come clean.

Wider Implications

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

Critics have previously accused Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to pursue its rivals—allegations that authorities have always rejected.

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