Singapore
Raeesah Khan breaks down in court: Her testimony takes centre stage in Pritam Singh’s trial
Raeesah Khan broke down in court as she recounted her emotional turmoil during the first day of the trial, where Opposition Leader Pritam Singh is accused of misleading the Committee of Privileges. Khan alleged that Singh had advised her to continue lying about a fabricated parliamentary anecdote in 2021.
Opposition Leader Pritam Singh went on trial on 14 October 2024, facing charges of giving false testimony to the Committee of Privileges (COP) regarding his handling of former Workers’ Party (WP) MP Raeesah Khan’s fabricated parliamentary anecdote.
The charges focus on allegations that Singh misled the committee about whether he advised Khan to reveal her fabrication.
Khan’s falsehood dates back to a speech in Parliament on 3 August 2021, where she falsely recounted an anecdote about accompanying a rape victim to a police station.
In her story, a police officer allegedly made inappropriate comments about the victim’s attire and alcohol consumption. Khan later admitted to fabricating the story, and the trial now centres on whether Singh, knowing the anecdote was untrue, advised her to continue withholding the truth.
The prosecution, led by Deputy Attorney-General Ang Cheng Hock, argued that Singh misrepresented his actions to the COP during hearings on 10 and 15 December 2021.
Prosecutors claim Singh falsely testified that he had advised Khan to correct her false statement when, in reality, he allegedly suggested she could maintain her narrative. Ang argued that Singh was trying to “downplay his responsibility” in the matter.
The prosecution also focused on two key meetings between Singh and Khan. The first occurred on 8 August 2021 at Singh’s home, with WP senior members Sylvia Lim and Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap present.
Khan testified that Singh told her they would “probably have to take this to the grave” after learning of her fabricated anecdote. Lim reportedly added that the issue “probably would not come up again.” According to Khan, this gave her the impression that her party leaders did not want her to reveal the truth.
A second critical meeting took place on 3 October 2021, a day before another parliamentary session. Khan testified that Singh visited her at home and told her, “I don’t think the issue will come up, but if it does, I won’t judge you for continuing with the narrative.” She understood this to mean that Singh would support her if she continued lying.
During the next day’s parliamentary session, Khan maintained her fabricated anecdote when questioned by Law Minister K Shanmugam, citing confidentiality as the reason she could not provide further details.
The court also viewed videos of the parliamentary sessions where Khan repeated her lies in October when confronted by Minister for Home Affairs and Law, K Shanmugam. Khan was seen referring to her phone after sending Singh the message asking, “what to do.”
She said that she was hoping that Singh would reply to her message, but he did not.
When asked in court by Deputy Public Prosecutor Sivakumar Ramasamy why she had not mentioned Singh’s advice to Parliament during her eventual clarification on 1 November 2021, Khan responded that she wanted to “protect” her party leaders and “take full responsibility” for her actions.
She reiterated that her intention was to shield others from being implicated. The prosecution noted that even after Leader of the House Indranee Rajah sought further clarification in Parliament about what advice Singh had given, Khan remained silent to avoid involving WP leaders.
During her testimony, Khan broke down in tears, explaining that she was “terrified” about the possibility of exposing her own history as a sexual assault survivor.
She admitted that her fear of revealing such private information contributed to her decision to maintain the fabricated anecdote. Khan described her growing anxiety as she continued to lie, stating, “I was scared of what would happen if I told the truth.”
During cross-examination, Khan continued to break down while describing how Singh had shared details of her sexual assault with the COP without her permission—details that even her parents were unaware of. She expressed frustration over this breach of confidence, particularly because Singh had been her mentor and someone she looked up to.
Another point of contention for Khan was Singh’s condescending behaviour towards her. In court, she recounted text messages in which she vented about Singh’s “condescending tone.”
In one message to her close confidantes, former WP members Loh Pei Ying and Yudhishthra Nathan, Khan shared a screenshot of an email from Singh and wrote about how “he looks at me differently now.” Khan testified that Singh’s tone had grown increasingly dismissive towards her, which added to her emotional strain.
The trial is expected to hear further testimony from key witnesses, including former WP leader Low Thia Khiang. Both Loh and Nathan, who were close to Khan during her time as an MP, are also set to testify. Both former WP members have since resigned from the party.
Singh’s lawyer, Andre Jumabhoy, is expected to argue that Singh’s instructions to Khan were misinterpreted and that he did not intentionally mislead the COP. Jumabhoy, a former prosecutor, will cross-examine Khan in the coming days.
If convicted, Singh could face up to three years in prison, a fine of up to S$7,000 (US$5,360) for each charge, or both.
A fine exceeding S$10,000 for a charge could disqualify Singh from Parliament and prevent him from running for election for five years.
The trial is set to continue until 24 October 2024, with the outcome being closely watched for its potential impact on Singapore’s political landscape.
