Defence denied access to unredacted messages in Pritam Singh's trial

On Wednesday, 23 October 2024, the defence in Pritam Singh's trial was denied access to a set of unredacted messages from former Workers' Party (WP) cadre Yudhishthra Nathan.

These messages were part of a chat group involving Nathan, former WP Member of Parliament Raeesah Khan, and former WP cadre Loh Pei Ying.

All three individuals are prosecution witnesses in Singh’s trial, where he faces allegations of lying to a Committee of Privileges (COP) regarding Khan’s false anecdote in parliament.

Singh’s lead counsel, Andre Jumabhoy, had requested the unredacted messages on 21 October, asserting that they were pertinent to evaluating Nathan's credibility.

He also suggested they could reveal whether Nathan and Loh had coordinated their evidence.

In addition to the unredacted messages, Jumabhoy sought access to the redacted versions that Nathan submitted to the COP and the reasoning behind those redactions.

While the defence had been provided with similar documents for Loh, the same had not been extended for Nathan.

Deputy Attorney-General Ang Cheng Hock opposed the application, arguing that the defence's request did not meet the necessary legal threshold for disclosing such messages.

DAG Ang explained that for the court to order disclosure, there must be a basis to believe the messages would affect the accused's guilt or innocence.

He further noted that the messages in question were sent after 4 October 2021, and that the prosecution had already disclosed to the defence any discussions relevant to Singh's charges, which relate to events between 8 August and 3 October 2021.

Deputy Principal District Judge Luke Tan, in addressing the defence’s request, referred to the Kadar disclosure obligations.

These obligations require the prosecution to disclose any unused material that is likely admissible and relevant to the guilt or innocence of the accused.

After reviewing both the redacted and unredacted messages, Judge Tan concluded that none of the messages met these criteria and, therefore, there was no legal basis to compel their disclosure.

The judge also responded to the defence’s claim that the messages could shed light on the witnesses' credibility, particularly regarding discrepancies between their testimony to the COP and their evidence in court.

Judge Tan noted that Loh had testified before the COP on 2 December 2021, while Nathan had testified the following day.Both individuals had submitted relevant messages to the COP after their oral testimonies.

However, he pointed out that since the redacted messages were only provided to the COP afterwards, they were not available to the committee during the witnesses’ testimony, making it unlikely that withholding these documents would affect the comparison between their COP and court statements.

In his ruling, Judge Tan stated that there was no doubt as to Nathan’s credibility, a point which extended to all witnesses in the case.

He also made clear that the court's role was not to comment on the COP's conclusions or the evidence presented to the committee, as the COP operates under different conditions and objectives from the court.

Earlier in the trial, Nathan admitted that he and Loh had discussed which messages to redact after giving their testimony to the COP, acknowledging that this violated the committee's instructions.

The COP had been investigating Khan’s conduct after she lied in parliament about accompanying a rape victim to a police station, where the victim was allegedly questioned about her attire and alcohol consumption.

One particular message sent by Nathan on 12 October 2021 had already been disclosed by the prosecution.

In it, Nathan suggested not providing "too many details" and, at most, apologising for inaccuracies regarding the victim’s age.

Both Nathan and Loh had redacted this message from their submissions to the COP, with Loh later admitting that she had lied about the reason for the redaction.

During the trial, Jumabhoy characterised this message as evidence of Nathan encouraging Khan to continue misleading parliament about the rape victim.

Judge Tan highlighted that aside from the 12 October 2021 message, which had already been disclosed, the other messages did not undermine the prosecution’s case or bolster the defence’s position.

DAG Ang had wanted to retrieve the two sets of documents (redacted and non-redacted messages) but Judge Tan said he would keep the documents with the court as another court might be looking at them.

The hearing continues with Nathan still on the stand.