🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal ruling, Singapore's main political rival Pritam Singh has lost his appeal against a guilty verdict of lying to a legislative panel.

In February, Singh was ordered to pay S$14,000 for two charges connected with his management of former lawmaker Raeesah Khan, who had admitted to giving false testimony in parliament.

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

Leader's Response

Singh, who leads the main political opposition, expressed that he was "disappointed" with the ruling but accepted it "fully and without reservation".

He promptly paid his fines at the court complex after the hearing. "Might as well get it done," he commented to reporters.

Notwithstanding the verdict, Singh retains his seat in parliament and affirmed his intention to continue serving Singaporeans alongside his colleagues.

Background of the Case

The controversy began in 2021 when Raeesah Khan asserted in parliament that she had seen police act inappropriately towards a sexual assault victim.

She later confessed her anecdote was fabricated, but testified during a parliamentary committee investigation that party leaders, such as Singh, had instructed her to "stick to the story" despite knowing it was a lie.

Khan has since stepped down from both the party and parliament. She was penalized S$35,000 for perjury and abusing her parliamentary privilege.

Court's Rationale

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 throughout the trial, countered that he had wanted to allow Khan space to handle what was a sensitive issue.

The Appeal Arguments

During the appeal hearing, Singh's legal counsel contended that the lower court had "ignored crucial pieces of evidence" in its initial judgment.

The defense also sought to cast doubt on the credibility of Khan and her aides, who provided testimony.

When asked why Singh appeared to be "doing nothing" to have Khan own up in the weeks following his discovery of her lie, his lawyer stated that he had other pressing commitments to attend to.

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

Wider Implications

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

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

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