‘I revered him’: 7 key points from former WP MP Raeesah Khan’s testimony in Pritam Singh trial

SINGAPORE – Former Sengkang GRC MP Raeesah Khan is the first witness the prosecution called to testify on Oct 14, the first day of the trial of Workers’ Party (WP) chief and Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh.

Singh is contesting two charges over his alleged lies to a parliamentary committee convened in November 2021 to look into the lying controversy involving Ms Khan.

Ms Khan had, on Aug 3, 2021, told Parliament about how she had accompanied a sexual assault victim to a police station,

where the victim was treated insensitively.

She repeated the claim before the House on Oct 4 the same year, before admitting to her lie on Nov 1, 2021.

Here are seven points that surfaced from Ms Khan’s testimony on the first day of the trial: 

1. Singh suggested that WP leaders and Ms Khan take her untruth ‘to the grave’

After relating the anecdote in Parliament on Aug 3, she admitted to Singh that it was untrue on Aug 7 after persistent questioning from the WP chief.

Ms Khan testified that when they met on Aug 8, 2021, Singh initially said he should take her to the Committee of Privileges, but then changed his mind and said

“this is something we would all have to take to the grave”.

From that meeting, which was when she disclosed her lie to WP chairwoman Sylvia Lim and vice-chairman Faisal Manap, Ms Khan said her understanding was that she did not have to do anything.

This was after Ms Lim told her that the anecdote would probably not come up again. She also received no advice from the WP leaders on actions to be taken, whether it be to draft a speech, make a clarification, or e-mail the police with more information, she said.

Right after the meeting ended at around 12.40pm, Ms Khan sent a message to WP cadres Loh Pei Ying and Yudhishthra Nathan about what transpired, which was that she had told the WP leaders about her untruth and “they said it would be best to take the info to the grave”.

Ms Khan said she did so as she had admitted her lie to the two party cadres, whom she called her close friends in WP, and wanted to keep them updated.

2. ‘He wouldn’t judge me for continuing to lie’

Singh next met Ms Khan at her home on Oct 3, 2021, where they had a private chat at the corner of her living room.

He told her that her lie was unlikely to come up in Parliament the next day. But if it did, he would not judge her for continuing the narrative, recounted Ms Khan.

Asked what she meant by “continuing the narrative”, Ms Khan said it meant continuing to lie. This made her feel confident that she had his support, and grateful as he had gone to see her at her home, she added.

Law and Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam raised the issue the next day. Four minutes into his ministerial statement, Ms Khan sent Singh the message: “What should I do, Pritam?”

She had hoped that Singh would reaffirm what he said the day before, but he did not reply. She kept up her lie, and said she was unable to reach the victim in her anecdote.

That night, Ms Khan met Singh and Ms Lim at the Leader of the Opposition’s office. She offered to tell the truth, but Singh told her “it’s too late for that”, she said.

3. Party leaders were deeply involved in Ms Khan’s public statements

The prosecution’s line of questioning sought to show the degree of involvement that WP’s leaders had in key public statements by Ms Khan, including her statement to address the fallout around Muslim issues from her Aug 3, 2021, speech in Parliament.

This draft statement, prepared on Aug 8, was shared with Singh to “get his approval”, as well as Mr Faisal for his input, said Ms Khan.

The court heard that Singh sent a version he had edited to Ms Khan, and told her to “read this version carefully, word by word” and to let him know what she thought. Ms Khan then made some further edits, and after Singh gave his go-ahead, she posted it on Facebook.

In contrast, her understanding from the Aug 8 meeting was to not do anything about her untrue anecdote, she said. 

It was only on Oct 12 that Ms Khan said she was advised by WP leaders to clarify her untruth. At a meeting with Singh and Ms Lim at his house, the WP chief said it would be best for her to tell the truth, and Ms Khan was told to draft a statement and to deliver it when Parliament next sat.

Nine drafts were eventually prepared in the lead-up to her clarification on Nov 1, 2021. This was because there was some back and forth on what she should say, taking in points from Singh, Ms Lim, Ms Loh and Mr Nathan.

WP leaders were also closely involved in her public apology when some old Facebook posts of hers resurfaced after she was put forward as a candidate for the 2020 General Election, prompting her to have to “make a short speech” to the media in the lead-up to the polls.

When Deputy Public Prosecutor Sivakumar Ramasamy asked if anyone had helped her with this speech, Ms Khan said the media team had helped, with Singh giving his input as well.

4. Ms Khan ‘wanted to protect’ her leaders

In her Nov 1, 2021, statement in Parliament admitting to her lie, Ms Khan did not mention that she had disclosed her untruth to Singh on Aug 7 and to the other WP leaders on Aug 8.

Asked why, she said she wanted to protect them, and did not want to implicate anybody else in her mistake.

The prosecution then asked her why she omitted to mention Singh’s Oct 3 advice to her to maintain her lie, when quizzed by Leader of the House Indranee Rajah on Nov 1 as to why she repeated her lie to Parliament on Oct 4.

To this, Ms Khan reiterated her earlier point about wanting to protect her party leaders, and to take full responsibility for her mistake.

After she delivered her Nov 1 statement, Singh said she did well and he was there if she needed anything else from him. Ms Khan said the messages made her feel comforted and supported.

5. Ms Khan underestimated need to substantiate her Aug 3, 2021, speech

Recounting her speech that contained the untrue anecdote, Ms Khan said Singh had seen the anecdote on the morning of the Parliament sitting. He had circled a part of it and wrote the word “substantiate” on a printed copy of the speech before returning it to her.

Ms Khan, however, did not make any further changes to the speech as she “didn’t really understand the severity of what he wrote”, she told the court. 

“I thought if it was something important, he would sit down and have a conversation with me, but he didn’t, so I didn’t make any changes,” she added.

DPP Ramasamy followed up by asking what she understood by the word “substantiate”, and Ms Khan said she thought it meant that she “had to make sure it happened”. 

She said she kept the anecdote in her speech as she had heard accounts of survivors being questioned in ways that were “not helpful” and which affected their confidence, “but obviously (lying) was a terrible thing to do”.

6. ‘Politically speaking, it was a bad day in the office for us’

After Ms Khan’s speech in the House on Aug 3, 2021, Singh continued to message Ms Khan on Aug 4 and 5 to comfort her. He also urged her to contact the rape victim cited in her anecdote.

In one of these messages on Aug 4, Singh said: “Please don’t be beguiled by this support, politically speaking it was a bad day in the office for us”. 

Ms Khan replied to Singh’s text, saying: “I wonder, Pritam, if I’m not cut out for this.” She followed this up with another text that read: “Perhaps we can meet next week to discuss my future and if this path is meant for me”. 

This was because she was feeling “extremely lost” after having made her mistake, said Ms Khan. She was also having a lot of self-doubt over whether being an MP suited her.

Singh texted Ms Khan again on Aug 5 to ask if she had any luck contacting the woman mentioned in her anecdote, and the organisation that had linked Ms Khan up with her.

By this point, Ms Khan said, she was terrified and “kind of just wanted the messages to stop”, so she responded with: “I am still trying and will update you as soon as I can.”

Asked why she did not tell Singh the truth on Aug 5, Ms Khan said she was still grappling with her mistake and the effect it would have on other survivors of sexual assault.

Telling the truth would also have meant telling Singh about her personal experience of sexual assault, which was difficult, she added.

Ms Khan later broke down in court when asked who knew about her personal experience of sexual assault. She said WP’s leaders did not ask her to tell her parents about her experience, and she had not planned to do so.

“I don’t think any parent wants to hear that their child has been assaulted in that kind of way,” she said. 

“As a mum myself, it would be so painful to hear from my daughter that something happened to her, so you know, I never intended for (my parents) to learn about the specifics of the assault, which later they did because of what Mr Singh said at the Committee of Privileges without my permission,” she added.

7. Ms Khan had ‘revered’ Singh

As a political newbie in 2020, Ms Khan said she saw Singh as a mentor and someone who could guide her as an MP.

“I revered him. I thought he was someone I really looked up to, someone that I thought really knew everything, someone that would have all the answers,” she told the court. 

Asked to recount her time as a first-term MP when she was 26 years old, Ms Khan said she faced a “tricky time” after entering Parliament, as she had felt alone and unsure of herself.

It was Singh who had approached her and told her to run as a candidate in the last general election, which was held on July 10, 2020. She had just started volunteering with the party at the start of that year, while Singh was already WP’s secretary-general.

As a volunteer, she helped in Singh’s Meet-The-People Sessions as a case writer and later with his house visits. 

The court also heard that, upon disclosing to the three WP leaders on Aug 8, 2021, that she had lied, Ms Khan was relieved as she had told the people she trusted most in the party to advise her on the matter.

“I felt a huge sense of relief because I didn’t hold that lie in me any more,” she added.