Day 1 of Pritam Singh’s trial: Prosecution reveals case and witness list, Raeesah Khan on the stand

SINGAPORE: Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh went on trial on Monday (Oct 14) in a closely watched case, contesting two charges for essentially lying in Parliament when being questioned over former Workers’ Party (WP) member Raeesah Khan’s own lies.
Ms Khan had lied in Parliament twice in 2021 about accompanying a rape victim to a police station, where a police officer allegedly made comments about the woman’s attire and consumption of alcohol.
Here is all you need to know about what went down on the first day of the trial – an unprecedented prosecution for “wilfully” giving false answers to a Committee of Privileges (COP) under the Parliament (Privileges, Immunities and Powers) Act.
Singh, a 48-year-old father of two, is accused of making the following two lies before the COP on Dec 10 and Dec 15, 2021:
The team of prosecutors, led by former High Court justice and current Deputy Attorney-General Ang Cheng Hock, revealed their case in a lengthy opening statement on Monday morning.
Mr Ang, a senior counsel, charged that Singh had given false testimony before the COP in order to downplay his responsibility in the matter of Ms Khan’s lie.
Singh had first discovered that her anecdote about accompanying the rape victim was untrue in a phone call with Ms Khan on Aug 7, 2021.
A day later, Singh met with Ms Khan, Ms Lim and Mr Faisal Manap at Singh’s home. They first discussed the fallout from Ms Khan’s speech on Muslim issues including polygamy and female genital cutting, before moving to the issue of Ms Khan’s lie.
The prosecution said it was clear to Ms Khan from the meeting that her party leaders did not want her to clarify the untruth, and that she should leave the matter be.
Ms Khan did not attend parliamentary sittings in September as she was down with shingles.
The deputy attorney-general charged that Singh had guided Ms Khan during another meeting on Oct 3, 2021, to maintain the lie if the matter was raised in parliament the next day.
The prosecution also tendered a list of its intended witnesses.
These include former WP chief Low Thia Khiang, and two former WP cadres who were Ms Khan’s close confidantes: Ms Loh Pei Ying and Mr Yudhishthra Nathan.
Ms Loh was formerly secretarial assistant to Ms Khan, and secretarial assistant to Singh from March 2013 to January 2016. 
Mr Nathan was a party volunteer and secretary of Sengkang Constituency Committee, which Ms Khan chaired. Both have since resigned from the party.
Ms Khan took the stand on Monday morning as the first witness for the prosecution. She is expected to testify for the next few days at least.
She appeared nervous at first, but answered questions from Deputy Public Prosecutor Sivakumar Ramasamy readily, sighing at some points when asked about her lie.
She broke down at one point when revealing that Singh had revealed details about her sexual assault – that she had not told even her own parents – without her permission.
She shared about how she got involved with WP and got to know Singh through volunteer work with the party in early 2020.
It was Singh who approached her to run as a candidate for WP in 2020, she said, and she looked up to him as a mentor and someone who “really knew everything” and “would have all the answers”.
The pivotal speech she made in parliament on Aug 3, 2021 did not always contain her false anecdote of the rape victim, but she added it in a few days before.
She sent Singh a draft of her speech, and he circled a part of the anecdote, writing “substantiate” before returning it to her, but did not speak to her about it.
Not understanding “the severity of what he wrote”, Ms Khan did not make any changes. She delivered the speech on Aug 3, 2021, and it set off a series of probes, discussions and clarifications.
Ms Khan testified about how “terrified” she felt that her lie would be exposed – mainly because she would have to share her own account of sexual assault, which she had kept private to herself, her husband and a therapist.
She continued her lie, telling Singh the truth only over a phone call on Aug 7, 2021, when he asked her point-blank about it.
After Singh roped her into the meeting on Aug 8, 2021 with Ms Lim and Mr Faisal Manap, Ms Khan said her impression was that they were to take it to the grave.
This was because Singh said “this would probably be something that we would have to take to the grave”, and because Ms Lim said the issue probably would not come up again.
On Oct 3, 2021, a day before another parliamentary sitting, Singh visited Ms Khan’s home with his wife.
According to Ms Khan, Singh said “something along the lines of – I don’t think the issue will come up but if it does come up he’s not going to judge me for continuing with the narrative”.
Ms Khan took this to mean that Singh would not judge her if she continued to lie.
She said she was prepared to lie again on Oct 4, 2021, because she was “terrified of what would happen” if she told the truth, and because “it seemed that Pritam was supportive of me continuing to lie”.
When parliament sat on Oct 4, 2021, Law Minister K Shanmugam spoke about Ms Khan’s anecdote and requested further details from her on when it happened, which police station it was at and which police officers were involved.
This was for the purpose of investigating the issue.
In text messages shown to the court, Ms Khan texted Singh while in the parliament chambers, asking: “What should I do, Pritam”.
She testified that she was “really terrified” and did not know what to do.
Singh did not reply immediately. When called on by then-speaker Tan Chuan-Jin to respond to Mr Shanmugam, Ms Khan maintained her lie and said she did not wish to share further details, citing confidentiality.
Singh later replied to Ms Khan to say they would speak after the parliament sitting, and asking her to keep Ms Lim and him posted.
Ms Khan testified that Ms Lim later spoke to her about standing orders and what procedures will be like with a COP, which Ms Khan took to mean Ms Lim was outlining what may happen if the issue was pressed.
Ms Khan later sent messages to a group chat she had with then-WP cadres Ms Loh and Mr Nathan, saying: “I’m trying not to panic, but I’m really scared”.
Fearing that someone was reading their messages, the group agreed to delete some messages from the chat. Ms Khan said she thought the deleted messages were about the fact she had lied.
Ms Khan then prepared a draft statement responding to Mr Shanmugam, where she wrote about feeling disappointed that the government had pushed her to break “all forms of confidentiality and consent” and instead focused more on grilling her.
However, Ms Loh told her this “would be a terrible thing to say” and Ms Khan did not ultimately make this statement in parliament.
Ms Khan said that late at night on Oct 4, 2021, towards the end of that day’s parliamentary sitting, she asked if she should come clean in a meeting with Singh and Ms Lim.
“I did say, should I tell the truth? And Pritam’s response was, ‘It’s too late for that’,” she testified.
Ms Khan was also asked why she did not mention that Singh and other WP leaders had known about her lie earlier, when she came clean in parliament on Nov 1, 2021.
“I wanted to protect them. I didn’t want to implicate anybody else in the mistake that I made and I wanted to take full responsibility for what happened,” she said.
In other messages to the group chat with Ms Loh and Mr Nathan, Ms Khan wrote about how Singh “looks different at me now” and shared a screenshot of an email Singh sent to her and some others.
She said she shared the screenshot to vent her frustration about the “very condescending tone” Singh sometimes used on her.
Singh had also sent an email to all sitting WP MPs on Oct 1, 2021 about parliamentary protocol. In the email, he cited an extract of an old debate stating how important it was to defend and back up what a person has said in parliament, or risk being hauled up before the COP.
Ms Khan said she felt this was “almost a dig at me”, or because Singh wanted to “maybe placate the other MPs in whatever frustrations they had against me”.
Ms Khan ultimately admitted to her lie. She resigned from the WP and as an MP, and was given a S$35,000 fine on the COP’s recommendations.
Ms Khan will continue testifying on Tuesday. When the prosecution is done with its examination in chief, Singh’s lawyer Mr Andre Jumabhoy, a former prosecutor himself, will cross-examine her.
The trial is set to go on for the rest of the week until next Thursday (Oct 24) before Deputy Principal District Judge Luke Tan.
The penalties Singh faces are a maximum jail term of three years, a fine of up to S$7,000 (US$5,360), or both per charge.
If he is fined at least S$10,000, he could lose his seat as an MP and be disqualified from standing in elections for five years.
The Attorney-General’s Chambers had previously said that the prosecution would seek a fine for each charge if Singh is convicted.
Experts previously told CNA that the outcome for Singh depends on the reading of the Constitution.
“Unless there are very compelling reasons, the courts will likely go along with what the prosecution seeks as appropriate,” said former Nominated MP Eugene Tan, who teaches constitutional law at the Singapore Management University.
According to the associate professor, “there is no basis to read the Constitution as indicating that you can add the different fines together”.