Does Pritam Singh’s Lies Deserve a Jail Sentence?
In a headline that reads like a courtroom drama, Singapore’s Committee of Privileges has tossed a serious accusation at the Leader of the Opposition – Pritam Singh. They claim his fibs to a parliamentary committee might amount to perjury, a crime as serious as a broken promise with a legal jaw.
Setting the Stage: The Committee’s Findings
The committee’s report, published just last Thursday (Feb 10), points out that Singh played the “key and leading role” in telling Ms. Raeesah Khan not to admit her lie in Parliament on Aug 3. Khan had already spun a tale about escorting a sexual assault survivor to the police station – a claim that turned out to be a falsehood.
During the committee’s own hearings, Singh was found to have shielded Ms. Khan from taking responsibility. The committee described this as “dishonourable… and a contempt of Parliament.” Though they can’t slap sanctions on him and two other WP leaders (Ms. Sylvia Lim and Mr. Faisal Manap) who were in the know from Aug 8, Parliament can step in if it chooses to penalize them.
Why the Cholera‑Like Rigor?
The Committee of Privileges is ticking all the boxes under the Parliament (Privileges, Immunities, and Powers) Act. It can hand out everything from a fine of up to $50,000 to a possible jail term that won’t outlast the MP’s remaining tenure. It can even suspend him or ask the Speaker to pass on a stern warning. But the committee says this may not be the best route here.
They claim that public prosecutors, with a fresh set of eyes and the freedom to pull in police evidence—phone records, emails, the works—are better suited to juggle the case. It’s a chance to see if the evidence supports a criminal charge before the courtroom opens its doors.
The Big Question: Why Treat Singh Differently?
Some on social media are puzzled: why is Singh being whacked by the Public Prosecutor while Ms. Khan is being handled by Parliament? Eugene Tan, an associate professor of law and special guest in the discussion, insists that the difference is the scale. Singh’s lie “went beyond a breach of privilege and moved into the realm of criminal wrongdoing.” Clinic time for the People’s Action Party government, he says, can keep the drama from getting too political.
Sunil Sudheesan, criminal lawyer and President of the Association of Criminal Lawyers of Singapore, echoes that the Prosecutor’s office will apply a thorough probe. He adds that the Prosecutor may decide to drop the case if the evidence doesn’t hold water.
What’s Next? The Verdict
- Singh is put on “the hook” to be referred to the Public Prosecutor.
- He gets a fair chance to defend himself with legal counsel.
- Should a criminal charge arise, he could be imprisoned for up to three years or fined.
- In addition to jail, a conviction could strip him of his MP seat and bar him from elections for five years.
- Parliament also retains the right to convene another Committee of Privileges if it feels that more insight is needed.
Bottom Line
Whether Pritam Singh’s lies land him in a courtroom or in a parliamentary sentence depends on the next steps the authorities take. The situation reflects Singapore’s tightrope walk between parliamentary privilege and criminal accountability. If you’re following this drama, keep your popcorn handy – the next chapter could be the most exciting yet.
