🔗 Share this article

In a major 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 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 judge stated that the evidence presented justified Singh's guilty verdict.

Reaction from the Accused

Singh, who heads the main opposition Workers' Party, expressed that he was "disappointed" with the decision but acknowledged it "completely and unequivocally".

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

Notwithstanding the verdict, Singh retains his seat in parliament and affirmed his commitment to keep working for 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 misbehave towards a survivor.

She later admitted her anecdote was fabricated, but testified during a official inquiry that party leaders, such as 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 perjury 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 correct the falsehood.

Singh, who maintained his innocence throughout the trial, 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 legal counsel argued that the initial court had "ignored crucial pieces of evidence" in its original ruling.

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

When asked why Singh appeared to be "doing nothing" to have Khan confess in the weeks following his discovery of her lie, his lawyer stated that he had other urgent professional and personal matters to manage.

The prosecution, however, argued that Singh's lack of action, alongside other evidence, demonstrated 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 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 occupies 12 out of 99 seats.