🔗 Share this article

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

In February, Singh was fined S$14,000 for two offenses related to his handling of former lawmaker Raeesah Khan, who had admitted to giving false testimony in parliament.

During a brief hearing before a packed public gallery on Friday, the judge declared that the evidence presented supported Singh's conviction.

Leader's Response

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

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

Notwithstanding the verdict, Singh keeps his parliamentary seat and stated his commitment to continue serving Singaporeans alongside his party members.

Background of the Case

The controversy originated in 2021 when Raeesah Khan asserted in parliament that she had witnessed police misbehave towards a sexual assault victim.

She later confessed her anecdote was untrue, but stated 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 penalized S$35,000 for perjury and abusing her parliamentary privilege.

Judicial Reasoning

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

Singh, who protested his innocence during the entire proceedings, argued that he had wanted to allow Khan space to handle what was a sensitive issue.

Points Contested

During the appeal hearing, Singh's lawyer contended that the initial 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 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 stated that he had other urgent professional and personal matters to manage.

The state's attorneys, however, argued that Singh's lack of action, coupled with other evidence, proved he never intended for Khan to come clean.

Wider Implications

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

Observers have previously accused Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to pursue its political opponents—allegations that authorities have consistently denied.

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