🔗 Share this article Singapore Court Affirms Conviction for Political Rival Pritam Singh Pritam Singh attended a court session in November to challenge his conviction. In a significant court decision, Singapore's main political rival Pritam Singh has failed in his challenge against a conviction of providing false statements to a legislative panel. Earlier this year, Singh was ordered to pay S$14,000 for two charges connected with his handling of former lawmaker Raeesah Khan, who had admitted to giving false testimony in parliament. During a brief hearing before a full public gallery on Friday, the judge stated that the evidence presented justified Singh's conviction. Reaction from the Accused Singh, who heads the main opposition Workers' Party, expressed that he was "disheartened" with the ruling but accepted it "fully and without reservation". He promptly paid his fines at the court complex following the hearing. "Might as well get it done," he remarked to reporters. Despite the conviction, Singh retains his seat in parliament and stated his intention to continue serving Singaporeans alongside his party members. 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 confessed her anecdote was fabricated, but testified during a official inquiry that party leaders, such as Singh, had instructed her to "continue with the narrative" despite knowing 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 "highly suggestive" that he did not want Khan to clarify her lie. Singh, who protested his innocence during the entire proceedings, argued that he had wanted to allow Khan space to deal with what was a delicate issue. Points Contested During the appeal hearing, Singh's lawyer argued that the initial court had "ignored crucial pieces of evidence" in its original ruling. The defense also sought to cast doubt on the credibility of Khan and her assistants, who provided testimony. When asked why Singh appeared to be "taking no action" to have Khan own up 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, argued that Singh's lack of action, alongside other evidence, demonstrated he never wanted Khan to come clean. Broader Context Singh's case is significant as one of the rare criminal convictions against a sitting opposition lawmaker. Observers have previously accused Singapore's government of leveraging the courts to target its rivals—charges that the government have consistently denied. The Workers' Party is the sole rival group in Singapore's current parliament, where it occupies 12 out of 99 seats.