Pritam Singh gives his version of events, says he did not tell ...

Updated

Nov 06, 2024, 12:41 PM

Published

Nov 05, 2024, 11:43 PM

SINGAPORE – Workers’ Party (WP) chief Pritam Singh said he did not tell former Sengkang GRC MP Raeesah Khan to “take the lie to the grave” on Aug 8, 2021, as he gave evidence in a trial over his alleged lies to a parliamentary committee.

Giving his version of events in court on Nov 5, 2024, Singh said when he told Ms Khan at a later meeting on Oct 3, 2021, that he would not judge her, he meant he would not do so if she took ownership and responsibility for her lie to Parliament.

What was said in these two meetings is central to the trial where Singh is fighting two charges over lying to the Committee of Privileges that he had, on Aug 8 and Oct 3, 2021, wanted Ms Khan to clarify her lie to Parliament.

Ms Khan had, on Aug 3, 2021, told Parliament that she had accompanied a sexual assault victim to a police station, where the victim was purportedly treated insensitively. She repeated the claim before the House on Oct 4 the same year, before admitting to her lie on Nov 1 that year.

On Nov 5, 2024, Singh’s lawyer Andre Jumabhoy asked the Leader of the Opposition if he had at the first meeting on Aug 8 told Ms Khan to take her lie to the grave.

“No, I did not,” Singh replied.

The prosecution has argued that Singh had, at the Aug 8, 2021, meeting, been prepared for Ms Khan and the WP leaders to “take (the matter) to the grave”.

“It was clear to Ms Khan then that her party leaders did not want her to clarify the untruth and that she could leave the matter be,” Deputy Attorney-General Ang Cheng Hock said on Oct 14, 2024, during the trial.

Singh told the court that after the Aug 8 meeting, he had made no “specific decision” on what had to be done. “In my mind, I knew that the matter would have to be clarified,” he added.

Asked if this was conveyed to Ms Khan at that meeting, Singh said it was not. Because of Ms Khan’s emotional state after telling party leaders about how she had been sexually assaulted in the past, he determined it would be better for her to settle herself, and the party would deal with the matter when she was ready, Singh said.

Singh said he was quite sure that the Government would follow up on Ms Khan’s anecdote on Aug 3, 2021, about police conduct, as then Minister of State for Home Affairs Desmond Tan had made it clear by saying the matter would not be swept aside.

“I know how the PAP (People’s Action Party) operates. And whenever there’s a chance to fix an opposition MP, or get tough at the opposition, they will jump at the chance,” Singh said.

Referring to text messages given to the court, Singh said he had repeatedly asked Ms Khan for more information about her anecdote between Aug 3 and 7.

He said she initially told him she was still trying to contact the victim, before admitting to him over a call on Aug 7 that the anecdote was false.

Asked for his response to her admission, Singh said: “I was very unhappy with her. I was actually very upset, and I cut the call and I told her we’ll talk about this.”

Singh then recounted the meeting on Aug 8, 2021, at his house between Ms Khan, himself, WP chair Sylvia Lim and vice-chair Faisal Manap. He said the party leaders were shocked when Ms Khan revealed she was sexually assaulted at age 18.

Asked by Singh who knew about the matter, Ms Khan said her husband, therapist and party aides Yudhishthra Nathan and Loh Pei Ying.

Singh said the conversation then moved to what was “politically more pressing” at that time – the reactions of some of the Muslim community in Singapore to Ms Khan’s speech, which also touched on female genital mutilation.

He told the court that the party leaders took Ms Khan at her word and did not ask her about the sexual assault. He added that she was very emotional at that point, and pursuing the matter was not on his mind at the time.

Singh also gave his account of the second meeting on Oct 3, 2021, which was held at Ms Khan’s house one day before she repeated her lie in Parliament on Oct 4.

“I wanted to speak to her. I shared with her that she’s gonna be back in Parliament. And the matter of her anecdote might come up,” Singh said.

“And if it did come up, she would have to take ownership and responsibility over the issue.”

Asked by Mr Jumabhoy what he meant by taking ownership and responsibility, Singh said: “I mean in the context of someone who had lied to me, lied to Parliament, and tried to cover up the lie in the course of my trying to find out more about it, in my view those words were clear that she had to tell the truth.

“And that’s what I meant by she had to take ownership and responsibility.”

Singh added that when he told Ms Khan to take ownership and responsibility, she started getting a little nervous and uncomfortable.

“I followed that up by telling her I will not judge you,” Singh said. “And what I meant by that was, I will not judge you if you take ownership and responsibility.”

Singh said Ms Khan had no further questions, which he took to mean that she understood “what she had to do” if the matter came up.

Ms Khan testified earlier that she thought Singh meant he would not judge her for continuing the narrative.

The prosecution has contended that “there was simply no way” Singh intended for Ms Khan’s lies to be clarified when Parliament sat on Oct 4, 2021.

Singh’s testimony also addressed other issues which came up earlier over the course of the trial.

The prosecution has said that there was no discussion about the untrue anecdote between Singh and Ms Khan from Aug 8 to Oct 3, 2021, let alone the fact that it ought to be clarified in Parliament.

“September came and went. We come to October. Between Aug 8 and Oct 2, silence by the accused person. Not a whisper from him about this untruth, what to do, whether (Ms Khan) had to correct it, how to correct it. It’s as if the matter had been buried,” Mr Ang told the court previously.

Asked what he and the WP were occupied with at the time, Singh said the period between August and October 2021 was “probably the busiest period for us throughout this term, even to date”.

He added that in August 2021, he and the party were busy preparing their positions for a parliamentary discussion on the Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement, which he said was the most significant political issue in Singapore at the time.

In September 2021, Singh said WP was busy preparing for the debate on the Foreign Interference (Countermeasures) Bill, which it opposed.

This, along with Ms Khan missing Parliament in September due to shingles, meant that no steps were taken to clarify the matter that month, he added.

Singh also addressed the roles of Ms Loh and Mr Nathan, who have been called as prosecution witnesses. He recounted a meeting on Oct 12, 2021, between himself and the duo.

Singh said Ms Loh and Mr Nathan were not at an earlier meeting he had that day with Ms Khan and Ms Lim, as “they had no role to play in my decision-making process as to what Raeesah had to do”.

He added that Ms Khan’s next course of action was a matter for the party leadership to determine, and they had already decided she should clarify her lie in Parliament.

At the Oct 12, 2021 meeting, Ms Loh and Mr Nathan did not appear keen for Ms Khan to admit to the truth, Singh said.

He added that Mr Nathan in particular suggested continuing with Ms Khan’s lie by saying that any clarification in Parliament should just cover the fact that she could not confirm the person’s age.

He said: “That was very strange to me because (of) where matters had already arrived at.”

Singh added it was very clear to him that Mr Nathan was suggesting “tripling down on her lie by manufacturing some other facts”.

“It was a ridiculous suggestion. I rejected it,” he said.

Singh will take the stand again on Nov 6, with the prosecution set to begin its cross-examination by late morning.