🔗 Share this article

In a major legal ruling, Singapore's opposition leader Pritam Singh has lost his appeal against a guilty verdict of lying to a legislative panel.

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

Reaction from the Accused

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

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

Despite the conviction, Singh retains his parliamentary seat and affirmed his commitment to keep working for Singaporeans together with his colleagues.

The Underlying Saga

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

She later confessed her account was untrue, but stated during a parliamentary committee investigation that party leaders, such as Singh, had advised her to "stick to the story" 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 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 during the entire proceedings, countered that he had wanted to give Khan time to handle what was a delicate issue.

Points Contested

During the appeal hearing, Singh's legal counsel contended 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 provided testimony.

When asked why Singh appeared to be "taking no action" to have Khan confess in the weeks following his discovery of her lie, his lawyer explained that he had other urgent professional and personal matters to manage.

The prosecution, however, maintained that Singh's lack of action, coupled with other evidence, proved he never wanted Khan to tell the truth.

Wider Implications

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

Critics have previously accused Singapore's government of using the judiciary to target its rivals—allegations 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.