🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal ruling, Singapore's opposition leader Pritam Singh has lost his appeal 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 admitted to giving false testimony in parliament.

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

Leader's Response

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

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

Notwithstanding the verdict, Singh keeps his parliamentary seat and affirmed his intention to continue serving Singaporeans together with his party members.

The Underlying Saga

The controversy began in 2021 when Raeesah Khan claimed in parliament that she had witnessed police act inappropriately towards a survivor.

She later confessed her account was untrue, but testified during a official inquiry 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 fined S$35,000 for perjury 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 clarify her lie.

Singh, who maintained his innocence throughout the trial, countered that he had wanted to allow Khan space to deal with what was a sensitive issue.

The Appeal Arguments

During the appeal hearing, Singh's lawyer argued that the initial 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 assistants, who served as witnesses.

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 stated that he had other urgent professional and personal matters to manage.

The state's attorneys, however, maintained that Singh's inaction, coupled with other evidence, proved he never intended for Khan to tell the truth.

Wider Implications

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

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

The Workers' Party is the only opposition party in Singapore's present legislature, where it holds 12 out of 99 seats.