Pritam probed about how he should have handled Raeesah, says prosecution’s logic worked if he was ‘a robot’

At the trial of Workers’ Party (WP) secretary-general Pritam Singh on Nov. 6, Singh continued answering the prosecution's questions after a lunch break.

In the morning, the prosecution's questioning focused on the statements Singh had made to the Committee of Privileges (COP) and his testimony in court during the trial, highlighting inconsistencies.

Deputy Attorney-General Ang Cheng Hock further grilled Singh on his follow-up actions after Raeesah Khan's untruth in Parliament on Aug. 3, 2021, as well as after her second time lying in parliament on Oct. 4, 2021.

Ang particularly probed Singh on why he did not "tell off" Raeesah after the second lie, if his position was to get Raeesah to confess the truth on Oct. 4, especially considering his position as the secretary-general of the party.

Singh replied that this would be "logical" if he was a "robot".

He had previously pointed to Raeesah's mental state at the time as the reason why he assessed that it would not "lead anywhere" if he came down hard on her.

On preparations for possibility of Raeesah confessing on Oct. 4, 2021

Ang questioned Singh on the preparations made for Raeesah to confess her lie in parliament on Oct. 4, 2021.

Singh said that he did not prepare any statements nor alert the Workers’ Party central executive committee (CEC) about the untruth.

This, he said, was because it was "clear" to him after his conversation with Raeesah the previous day, that "she would not have difficulty clarifying the matter when it came up".

Ang then asked if he made no preparations whatsoever for the possibility that the truth may be revealed by Raeesah at the Oct. 4 sitting.

Singh replied: “I show up at her house to tell her that the matter may come up–”

Ang interjected, telling him, “Please stop. Please stop... My question is a simple one. After this meeting, you made no preparation for the possibility that the truth might come out.”

Singh replied in the affirmative.

Ang then put it to Singh that he had proceeded on the basis that Raeesah would not come clean on Oct. 4, 2021, and that as far as Singh was concerned, Raeesah would not be telling the truth.

Singh disagreed on both points.

On what Singh meant when he said 'your call' to Raeesah

Ang then brought up Singh's description of his Oct. 3 conversation with Raeesah at the disciplinary hearing on Oct. 29 as one where he told Raeesah it was “your call”.

Ang added that what Singh meant by “your call” was him giving Raeesah a choice whether to tell the truth on Oct. 4 and that he guided her to maintain the untruth.

Singh disagreed with the prosecutor's suggestions.

Ang moved on to Singh's testimony during the COP hearing that he had made it "crystal clear" to Raeesah to tell the truth.

Referring to Singh's words that she was to take "ownership and responsibility" and that he would not judge her, Ang asked if Singh thought these were words were “crystal clear”.

Singh agreed.

When Ang asked if it was a "direction" by Singh to get Raeesah to tell the truth, Singh disagreed, saying Raeesah was an MP in her own right and that she should understand what taking ownership and responsibility looks like.

On Raeesah lying again on Oct. 4

The line of questioning then shifted to events after Raeesah lied a second time in Parliament on Oct. 4, 2024.

While Singh had maintained that he was clear with Raeesah about taking responsibility, the prosecution questioned Singh on why he did not correct Raeesah when she lied the second time.

Singh agreed that he had an obligation, as an MP himself, to correct a lie in parliament after becoming aware of it. But he said it had to be clarified in a "certain way" due to the circumstances.

On why he did not reply to Raeesah's message to him while Minister for Law and Home Affairs K Shanmugam's was questioning her, Singh said that he was busy with a debate on the Foreign Interference (Countermeasures) Act.

The prosecutor asked why Singh did not question or tell Raeesah off after she lied a second time.

Singh said he made an "assessment of her state" and did not believe coming hard on her would "lead anywhere", adding that he thought he had "secured a perspective from her that this anecdote will be clarified".

Ang further asked if Singh agreed that it would be "entirely logical" of Singh as the secretary-general of WP to tell Raeesah off for her actions in continuing to lie on Oct. 4.

Singh answered: “It would be logical if I was a robot.”

On email sent to WP members on Oct. 1

Ang moved on to question Singh about an email Singh had sent to Workers’ Party MPs on Oct. 1, 2021.

The two debated on whether the email was a "general email" addressed to everyone or to Raeesah about her lie.

In his email, Singh wrote about “how serious it is to be able to back up and defend what you say in Parliament, or risk being hauled up before the Committee of Privileges (COP)”.

Singh told the court that the e-mail was sent “in relation” to the lie Khan first told on Aug. 3, 2021.

He disagreed with Ang's suggestion that it was a general email.

Ang refered to Singh's reply to Minister for Culture, Community and Youth and Second Minister for Law Edwin Tong during the COP hearing in 2021, where Singh had described it as a “general e-mail to all the MPs”.

Singh replied to Ang saying, “It's a general e-mail because it’s addressed to everyone, but it’s more than that as well.”

Singh maintained that the email was "closely related" to the lie.

When Ang point out the inconsistency between what Singh had just said, and how he said "moments ago" that the email was "about" the lie.

Singh said: “I think that’s a rather pedantic way of putting it.”

To which Ang replied “Oh okay, I’m so sorry.”

“I’m not asking for your apology," said Singh, adding that he felt the email "covers the subject matter that concerns the lie."

On meeting with Low Thia Kiang

Another point the prosecution brought up was the meeting between Singh, former WP leader Low Thia Khiang, and WP chair Sylvia Lim on Oct. 11, 2021.

Singh disagreed with or did not recall the answers to most of the prosecution's questions, calling it an "unremarkable meeting".

Ang asked if the reasons for the meeting included telling Low of the police's request for interview with Raeesah or discussing her expulsion from the party.

Singh disagreed with both.

Singh was also asked if Low had asked at the meeting about when the three party leaders — Singh, Lim, and Faisal Manap — found out about the lie. Singh replied that he did not recall.

When asked if he did not tell Low that they had found out on Aug. 8, 2021 about the lie, Singh agreed, saying the meeting was to "handle this expeditiously".

The prosecution referred Singh to Low's earlier testimony about Low's comments to the WP leaders regarding whether the government knew that Raeesah had lied.

Low had testified that Lim replied that the government "has not known", and that it is "not easy to know, because there are so many police stations in Singapore."

Ang highlighted to Singh that Low said it was not the point whether the government could find out, but said that since Raeesah had lied in parliament, she should apologise and clarify in parliament.

Singh replied that this response sounded like what Low would say.

However, Singh said he did not recall saying, during the meeting, that he wanted Raeesah to clarify in parliament.

The prosecution's cross-examination of Singh will continue on Nov. 7.

Top photos from Reuben Nathan/Mothership