Privileges panel calls for $35k fine for Raeesah Khan

A parliamentary committee has recommended that former Workers' Party (WP) MP Raeesah Khan be fined and Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh be referred to the Public Prosecutor, over lies told in Parliament.

The Committee of Privileges said Ms Khan should be fined a total of $35,000 over lies she told the House in August and October last year.

It also said the Public Prosecutor should further investigate Mr Singh's conduct before the committee, "with a view to considering if criminal proceedings ought to be instituted".

The committee said it was satisfied that Mr Singh was untruthful in giving evidence under oath, and that this may amount to perjury, a serious criminal offence.

The committee, whose report was released yesterday, similarly recommended that WP vice-chairman Faisal Manap be referred to the Public Prosecutor over his refusal to answer relevant questions during its hearings, and to also consider if criminal proceedings ought to be instituted.

The committee's recommendations are expected to be debated when Parliament sits next week, with Leader of the House Indranee Rajah set to move a motion for MPs to vote on.

The panel is chaired by Speaker of Parliament Tan Chuan-Jin and comprises six other People's Action Party lawmakers and Hougang MP Dennis Tan from the WP.

In Parliament on Aug 3, Ms Khan falsely claimed to have accompanied a sexual assault victim to a police station where officers allegedly handled the matter insensitively.

She repeated this untruth on Oct 4, before coming clean to the House on Nov 1 and resigning as a WP member and MP for Seng-kang GRC on Nov 30.

Ms Khan, 29, was referred to the committee for breaching parliamentary privilege.

The committee hearings last December saw the release of over 30 hours of video recordings of conflicting testimonies.

The committee set out its considerations behind the sanctions in a report numbering over 1,000 pages.

It said Ms Khan must "take full and sole responsibility" for the untruth on Aug 3, which she had uttered twice while making a clarification on the same day. It recommended a fine of $25,000 for this.

For repeating the lie on Oct 4, the committee recommended a fine of $10,000. While repeating an untruth should ordinarily carry a higher penalty, there were "mitigating circumstances".

This included how Ms Khan had confessed internally to WP leaders on Aug 8, and that she had been acting thereafter based on the guidance and advice of WP leaders to "bury" or continue the untruth, the committee said.

Mr Singh, who is WP secretary-general and an MP for Aljunied GRC, was singled out by the committee for being the "key orchestrator" behind the circumstances leading to Ms Khan's repeated untruth on Oct 4.

The committee suggested that Parliament refer Mr Singh to the Public Prosecutor, citing - among other things - its belief that Mr Singh had lied to them on affirmation, and that the "seriousness of the matter" would be best served through a trial process where a court could look at the matter afresh and Mr Singh could defend himself with legal counsel.

The committee was of the view that WP chairman Sylvia Lim and Mr Faisal had played a "relatively subsidiary role" compared with Mr Singh. It also noted that Mr Faisal's refusal to answer questions pertaining to a meeting between WP leaders could amount to contempt of Parliament.

The committee report said WP MP Tan had objected to all the findings during a review of a draft, but had no further comments after a round of deliberations by committee members over his objections.

Posting on Facebook shortly after the release of the report, Mr Singh noted that there remains a number of unknowns, assuming that Parliament adopts the committee's recommendations.

"These include the eventual decision of the Public Prosecutor to prosecute, the intervening time before the matter goes to trial, the eventual verdict and any sentence meted out, and the prospect of both Faisal and I losing our parliamentary seats and stepping down as Members of Parliament if either of us is fined $2,000 or more," he added.