Pritam Singh hires lawyers to contest alleged perjury charges in Raeesah Khan case

SINGAPORE: Pritam Singh, Leader of the Opposition and Chief of the Workers’ Party (WP), has hired lawyers to defend him against two charges related to providing false information to a parliamentary committee.

The prosecution was initiated last month in court following a two-year police investigation into Singh’s actions during the Committee of Privileges proceedings related to former WP Member of Parliament Raeesah Khan.

The 47-year-old earlier entered pleas of not guilty to the two charges under Section 31(q) of the Parliament (Privileges, Immunities, and Powers) Act and opted for trial.

A pre-trial conference was convened on Wednesday (17 April) morning at the State Courts, during which Singh was not physically present.

Representing him were lawyers Andre Darius Jumabhoy and Aristotle Emmanuel Eng Zhen Yang, who attended the conference on his behalf before District Judge Chee Min Ping.

According to Singapore state media CNA, a note in the court’s system indicated that the pre-trial conference would be adjourned to 31 May, noting that “defence counsel has been recently instructed”.

Jumabhoy leads his own boutique law firm and is described on his website as “a dedicated trial lawyer” with extensive experience in criminal, civil, and white-collar crime law.

He commenced his legal career in 2003 as a barrister in London and later returned to Singapore in 2011, where he joined the Attorney-General’s Chambers as a Deputy Public Prosecutor.

Pritam Singh’s charges background

Ms Khan, a former MP of the WP, confessed to providing false information in parliament in 2021 regarding a rape case that she claimed was mishandled by the police.

Consequently, she was referred to the Committee of Privileges for breaching parliamentary privilege.

Several witnesses, including Ms Khan, Mr Singh, and prominent figures from the WP, testified during the hearings held in late 2021 and early 2022.

As outlined in a joint statement by the Singapore Police Force and Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC), Mr Pritam Singh faces specific charges:

1. On 10 December 2021, Mr Pritam Singh falsely testified that as at the conclusion of his meeting with Ms Raeesah Khan, WP Chairman Ms Sylvia Lim and vice-chairman Mr Faisal Manap on 8 August 2021, he wanted Ms Raeesah to, at some point, clarify in Parliament that what she told Parliament on 3 August 2021 about having accompanied a rape victim to a police station was untrue.
2. On 10 and 15 December 2021, Mr Singh falsely testified that when he spoke to Ms Raeesah on 3 October 2021, he wanted her to admit to having lied to Parliament on 3 August 2021 about having accompanied a rape victim to a police station, if this issue were to come up in Parliament on 4 October 2021.

Mr Singh disclosed in December 2021 that the party leadership was aware of Ms Khan’s falsehood in a parliamentary speech, a week after she delivered it on 3 August.

However, she reiterated her false statement in October 2021 and did not correct the record in parliament until a month later, on 1 November, when she confessed to lying and apologized in the House.

In its final report on 10 February 2022, the Committee of Privileges recommended that Mr Singh and Mr Faisal Manap be referred to the public prosecutor for giving false testimony under oath.

The joint statement also noted that the Prosecution, after reviewing all evidence, decided not to press charges against Mr Faisal Manap, WP MP for Aljunied GRC, for his refusal to answer relevant questions during the proceedings.

The police issued an advisory to Mr Manap, urging him to familiarize himself with the expected conduct of Members of Parliament under the Act and to avoid any actions that may breach it.

Singh, who became aware of these charges on 18 March, is accused based on his testimonies about discussions with Raeesah Khan and other party members concerning her false statement to Parliament in August and October 2021.

These offences could lead to a fine of up to S$7,000 and/or imprisonment for up to three years.

Survey reveals nearly half of respondents upset or angry over charges Against Singh

According to an Answers.sg poll conducted by Singapore’s online media outlet MS News, nearly half of the over 2,800 respondents expressed feelings of upset or anger regarding the charges against Singh.

Conversely, approximately one in seven respondents stated they felt happy, while nearly a quarter reported feeling neutral.

Among the 2,852 participants in the poll, 24% expressed anger towards Singh’s charges, and 22% indicated feeling upset.

Additionally, 27% reported their emotions as neutral, while 14% expressed feelings of either pleasure or surprise.

Pritam Singh, along with his fellow MP colleague in Aljunied GRC, was previously embroiled in the lengthy Aljunied-Hougang Town Council (AHTC) lawsuit.

They were forced to publicly solicit legal funds after accruing millions of dollars in legal fees.

In a landmark ruling on 29 Nov 2023, the Court of Appeal mandated that AHTC and Sengkang Town Council (SKTC) pay approximately S$388,800 (US$292,000) for the appeals’ costs and disbursements.

These suits targeted eight defendants, including WP leaders Ms Sylvia Lim, Mr Low Thia Khiang, and Mr Singh, along with their former managing agent FM Solutions and Services (FMSS), and four other former town councillors or employees.

The court acknowledged the WP town councillors’ substantial success in their appeals. Specifically, they were deemed to have acted in good faith when hiring FMSS as AHTC’s managing agent without an open tender.

Moreover, the court ruled that Mr Singh could not be held liable for negligence in AHTC’s payment procedures since he was not allowed to defend himself against the claim.

The 29 Nov 2023 ruling follows prior judgments in July 2023 and November 2022.

In these rulings, the apex court overturned several findings made by the High Court. The court will proceed to assess the damages to be paid, identify the recipients of these damages, and determine the liable parties.

As per the judiciary’s public hearing list, the cases were last brought before the court on 16 April for a pre-trial conference regarding Summons for Third Party Directions and Assessment of Damages.