SINGAPORE: On Monday (Feb 17), Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh will face the verdict in his trial for allegedly lying to the Committee of Privileges (COP).

Deputy Principal District Judge Luke Tan is expected to deliver his decision at the State Courts, concluding a legal battle that began nearly a year ago when Singh was charged. The trial wrapped up on Nov 8, 2024.

The 48-year-old chief of the Workers' Party (WP) faces two charges of wilfully making two false answers to the COP on Dec 10 and Dec 15, 2021, during an inquiry into a lie told in parliament by former WP MP Raeesah Khan.

His case is believed to be Singapore’s first prosecution under the Parliament (Privileges, Immunities and Powers) Act.

If acquitted, Singh cannot be tried again for the same offence on the same facts. His acquittal will stand unless the prosecution decides to appeal, which must be done within 14 days of the verdict.

If convicted, both sides will present arguments on the sentence Singh should receive before the judge delivers his ruling. Any appeal against the conviction or sentence must also be filed within 14 days of the sentencing.

It is also possible for Singh to be convicted and sentenced on one charge, and acquitted on the other.

WHAT IS AT STAKE

Given that Singapore’s next General Election is due by Nov 23, all eyes are on whether the WP secretary-general could be barred from contesting.

Under the Constitution, an individual fined at least S$10,000 (US$7,400) or jailed for at least one year is disqualified from standing for election or holding a parliamentary seat for five years.

Singh faces a maximum sentence of three years' imprisonment and a S$7,000 fine on each charge. If he is convicted and sentenced to jail, the judge will determine whether the prison terms run concurrently or consecutively. 

The Attorney-General’s Chambers has previously said that the prosecution will seek a fine for each charge.

Legal experts have told CNA that the outcome for Singh depends on the reading of the Constitution. If both fines are considered cumulatively, the maximum fine of S$14,000 could disqualify him as an MP and from standing in the next election.

The courts also have the discretion to impose a heavier sentence than what the prosecution seeks. A recent notable example was the one-year jail term given to former transport minister S Iswaran, which was almost double what the prosecution sought.

WHAT THE CASE IS ABOUT

The case stems from an Aug 3, 2021, parliamentary speech by Ms Khan, then an MP in the WP-controlled Sengkang constituency.

She falsely claimed she had once accompanied a rape survivor to file a police report, and that the officer had made inappropriate comments about the victim's attire and alcohol consumption.

Singh learnt of the lie in a phone call with Ms Khan on Aug 7.

However, when Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam pressed Ms Khan for details in parliament on Oct 4, Khan did not admit to lying. She eventually confessed a month later, leading to the COP's inquiry and a S$35,000 fine for abusing parliamentary privilege. 

During the COP hearings in December 2021, Singh allegedly falsely testified that:

• At the conclusion of a meeting involving Ms Khan and senior party members Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap on Aug 8, 2021, Singh wanted Ms Khan to clarify at some point in parliament that what she had said about accompanying a rape victim to a police station was untrue; and
• When Singh spoke to Ms Khan on Oct 3, 2021, he wanted to convey to Ms Khan that if the issue came up in parliament the next day, she had to clarify that her story about accompanying the rape victim was a lie.

The prosecution, led by Deputy Attorney-General Ang Cheng Hock, argued that Singh gave false testimony to the COP to downplay his responsibility in Ms Khan’s lie.

Singh maintained his innocence and denied asking Ms Khan to continue her false narrative.

The father of two, himself a lawyer, chose defence counsels Andre Darius Jumabhoy and Aristotle Emmanuel Eng of a boutique law firm named after Mr Jumabhoy to fight his case.

HIGHLIGHTS OF THE TRIAL

The trial opened on Oct 7, 2024 and unfolded over 13 days to a packed courtroom.

Ms Khan was the prosecution's first witness, returning to the public spotlight for the first time since resigning from her party and as an MP in late 2021.

She testified that Singh said she and the party leaders would have to take her lie “to the grave” during a meeting on Aug 8, 2021. She also said that at an Oct 3, 2021, meeting, Singh implied that he would not judge her if she continued to lie.

Ms Khan also described feeling “very defeated and betrayed” when a WP disciplinary panel comprising Singh, Ms Lim and Mr Faisal later grilled her about her conduct.

During cross-examination, Singh's lawyer Mr Jumabhoy portrayed her as a “liar” who tells lies “non-stop”. Judge Tan dismissed an attempt by the defence to impeach her credibility.

Singh testified in November, saying he was upset upon discovering Ms Khan's lie and believed the government would investigate the matter.

“I know how the (People’s Action Party) operates, and whenever there’s a chance to fix an opposition MP or get tough with the opposition, they would jump at the chance,” he said.

He denied instructing her to continue the false narrative or take the lie to the grave at their meeting on Aug 8. He also explained for the first time in court that his comment "I will not judge you" meant “I will not judge you if you take ownership and responsibility”.

Deputy Attorney-General Ang Cheng Hock accused Singh of “guiding (Ms Khan) to maintain the untruth” and pressed him on contradictions between his evidence in court and to the COP.

Former party cadres Loh Pei Ying and Yudhishthra Nathan, close confidantes of Ms Khan, also testified for the prosecution. 

They aligned with her reading of Singh asking her to maintain the false narrative and described candid discussions within the party on managing the fallout from Ms Khan's lie and its impact on public perception of the WP.

In a memorable turn of phrase, Ms Loh admitted to calling Ms Khan a “lao hong biscuit” because she “can buckle quite easily under pressure”. “Lao hong” is a Hokkien term that literally translates as “leak air” but can refer to something gone soft or stale.

In a highly anticipated testimony, former WP secretary-general Low Thia Khiang took the stand to testify against his successor.

Mr Low spoke about learning of Ms Khan’s lie at a meeting with Singh and Ms Lim on Oct 11, 2021. He recounted that Ms Lim said “the government has not known (about the lie), and it’s not easy to know, because there are so many police stations in Singapore”.

"I said it’s not the point whether or not the government can (find) out. If she tells a lie, I think she should apologise,” said Mr Low.