Raeesah Khan’s lie, its fallout and a motion against Pritam Singh before Parliament

SINGAPORE – In urging the House to support her motion to consider Workers’ Party chief Pritam Singh unsuitable to continue as Leader of the Opposition, Leader of the House Indranee Rajah traced the chain of events stemming from

former WP MP Raeesah Khan’s lie in Parliament

more than four years ago.

“That lie led to another, and another, and yet another, and then an inquiry by the Committee of Privileges (COP), where more lies were told – this time under oath,” she said.

On Dec 4, the High Court

upheld Mr Singh’s conviction

by a district court on two counts of lying before the COP. He was fined $14,000, which he paid on the spot.

“Now the matter has come full circle back to Parliament,” Ms Indranee said.

Ms Khan, a first-term WP MP elected in Sengkang GRC,

first lied in Parliament on Aug 3, 2021

, during a debate on WP’s “Empowering Women” motion. She falsely claimed she had accompanied a sexual assault survivor to make a police report, alleged the survivor left the station in tears, and said an officer made remarks about the survivor’s attire and drinking.

Ms Khan confessed to the lie to Mr Singh on Aug 7. A meeting was held the following day with WP chair Sylvia Lim and vice-chair Faisal Manap. The courts found that, at this meeting, Mr Singh told Ms Khan to

take the lie to the grave

, citing contemporaneous evidence in the form of a WhatsApp message Ms Khan sent to her aides.

The message stated that the three WP leaders “agreed that the best thing to do is to take the information to the grave”.

“The court found that their attitude had been clear and simple: They believed that there was no need to tell the truth because they did not think the matter would surface again – they thought it would be buried forever,” Ms Indranee said.

Here is a summary of the chain of events – from Ms Khan’s lie in 2021 and its fallout, to the motion in Parliament on Jan 14.

The lie

For the next two months until October 2021, Mr Singh did not discuss the matter with Ms Khan.

On Oct 3, 2021, one day before Parliament was due to sit, Mr Singh visited Ms Khan in her home. Believing her lie might be raised in the House the following day, he wanted to discuss how she should respond if the issue came up.

The district court found that, during this meeting, Mr Singh guided Ms Khan to stick to her lie in Parliament.

Ms Khan

repeated the lie in the House on Oct 4, 2021

, in response to a question from Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam seeking further details of her account. Mr Singh, who was present, did nothing to correct her.

On Oct 7, 2021, Ms Khan received an e-mail from the police requesting an interview to obtain more details, as they were investigating her allegation. She forwarded the e-mail to Mr Singh and the two other WP leaders.

What followed has been described as a turning point in WP’s response.

At a meeting with former WP secretary-general Low Thia Khiang on Oct 11, 2021, Mr Singh and Ms Lim sought his advice on how to handle the matter.

They did not disclose that they had known of Ms Khan’s lie since Aug 8, 2021. In the witness box during Mr Singh’s trial, Mr Low said he learnt this only two years later, in 2023.

Following the meeting, arrangements were made for Ms Khan to come clean.

The confession

Ms Khan admitted the lie in Parliament on Nov 1, 2021.

The WP

formed a disciplinary panel

the following day, comprising Mr Singh, Ms Lim and Mr Faisal.

On Nov 29, 2021, the COP began its inquiry into Ms Khan; Ms Indranee had earlier raised a complaint alleging a breach of parliamentary privilege.

Ms Khan told the COP that the three WP leaders had advised her to continue with the lie after she first made the claim in Parliament on Aug 3, 2021. The three denied this under oath. The COP later found that all three had lied to the committee.

On Nov 30, 2021, Mr Singh, Ms Lim and Mr Faisal recommended to the WP’s central executive committee that Ms Khan be expelled within 24 hours if she did not resign. She

resigned from the party

that same day.

On Dec 2, 2021, Mr Singh

held a press conference

in which he admitted for the first time that the three WP leaders had known of Ms Khan’s untruth since August 2021.

Parliament debated the COP’s report and adopted it on Feb 15, 2022. Ms Khan

was fined $35,000

, and Mr Singh was referred to the public prosecutor to be investigated for lying to the COP.

The trial

Mr Singh was charged in court on March 19, 2024, and after a 13-day trial, he was

convicted on Feb 17, 2025, of two counts of lying

to the COP.

“The court findings establish many disturbing facts about Mr Singh’s conduct,” Ms Indranee said. These included findings that he told Ms Khan to “take it to the grave”, and later guided her to continue with the lie.

Mr Singh

appealed against his conviction on Nov 4

, arguing that the trial judge had “ignored crucial pieces of evidence” in finding him guilty of lying under oath to a parliamentary committee.

On Dec 4, the High Court upheld the conviction. Mr Singh paid a $14,000 fine the same day.

Speaking to the media outside the Supreme Court

, he said: “While I am disappointed with the verdict, I respect and accept the judgment fully and without reservation.”

He added: “I certainly took too long to respond to Raeesah’s lie in Parliament. I take responsibility for that.”

The decision brought to a close what Mr Singh described as a long journey.

In a statement later that afternoon, WP said it was studying the court’s verdict and grounds of decision.

On Dec 19, Mr Singh and Mediacorp were

issued warning letters

by the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) over an interview on CNA’s programme The Assembly, for contempt of court.

In the interview, recorded in July after Mr Singh filed his appeal, he said he believed the

court of public opinion

could be “bigger than any court in the world” when asked about his February conviction, the AGC noted.

Mr Singh and Mediacorp

issued separate apologies

on Dec 13.

On Jan 3, WP announced it would

form a disciplinary panel

to assess whether Mr Singh had breached the party’s Constitution following his conviction.