'My conscience remains clear': Pritam Singh disagrees with motion, says he will press on & continue working for S'pore

Speaking in his defence on the motion against him, Workers' Party (WP) leader Pritam Singh disagreed that his conduct was dishonourable and unbecoming for a Member of Parliament (MP).

Describing how he was "disappointed" in the judgment, Singh also disagreed that he had guided Raeesah Khan to continue with her lie in Parliament, emphasising that his "conscience remains clear, as it will forever".

On Jan. 14, Leader of the House Indranee Rajah filed a motion in Parliament on Singh's conduct and to consider his suitability to continue as the Leader of the Opposition (LO).

The motion asked Parliament to:

• Affirm that honesty and integrity are fundamental pillars of Singapore’s parliamentary system,
• Note the findings of the High Court and COP,
• Express regret at Mr Singh’s conduct which was dishonourable and unbecoming of a Member of Parliament,
• Consider that such conduct renders him unsuitable to continue to hold the office of LO,
• Note that the High Court’s judgment and COP findings have implications for Sylvia Lim and Faisal Manap, which have to be considered separately,
• Call on all MPs to uphold their solemn duty to respect and abide by the law, act with integrity at all times and honour the trust placed in them by Singaporeans.

The only resolution of the six laid out that Singh agreed with in the motion were the first and last ones.

Raeesah Khan and her lie

Singh rejected the resolution that he guided Raeesah to continue her lie to Parliament, noting that the COP's findings went "much further" than the charges Singh faced.

"It is a fact that the subject of guiding Raeesah to continue to lie, which is found in the Leader of the House's motion, was not framed as a charge that was preferred against me," said Singh.

He added that it had referred the incident to the police and the public prosecutor for a review of all evidence afresh.

Therefore, the public prosecutor would have "no trouble" framing a charge against Singh for guiding Khan to lie if there was sufficient evidence that he had done so.

"My position is Khan was not told to lie, let alone guided to lie."

Conduct as an MP

Singh also disagreed that his conduct was "dishonourable and unbecoming of an MP", as he disagreed with the courts' and the COP's finding of guilt.

To argue his case, Singh obtained ex-WP cadre Loh Pei Ying's statement to the police.

This statement, Singh explained, is inadmissible in court and requires permission from the public prosecutor to use it outside trial proceedings.

He shared that he sought the public prosecutor's permission to refer to the statement for today's parliamentary motion, but that request was rejected.

However, Singh stated that Parliament is "sovereign" and is "supreme above all other government institutions, including the executive and judicial bodies".

He then passed a copy of Loh's statement to Speaker of the House, Seah Kian Peng, for his consideration.

Singh stressed that he was not relitigating the case, and that the statement he handed over was not admissible in court but remained a police statement made under oath.

This move prompted Minister for Law and Home Affairs, K Shanmugam, to seek clarification from Singh on whether there is "legal provision that governs the use of such documents.

"And does that give the Attorney-General Chambers power to say yes or no?"

Singh clarified that permission has to be granted by the public prosecutor to use the statements outside of criminal proceedings under Section 225A of the Criminal Procedure Code, to which Shanmugam responded:

"iIt would appear that it is set out in a legislative provision that such information can only be released within the framework set out in that legislation. I'm not sure that I've ever come across a situation where Parliament can ignore the legal position set out in law, but it's a matter of clarification."

Seah then shared that he will make his ruling on Singh's request later.

Cited Tharman's previous conviction

"There are those who believe that whatever our courts decide, a convicted person is unable to retain their belief that they are innocent in so far as a conviction is concerned," Singh continued his speech.

He cited how President Tharman Shanmugaratnam was convicted of negligence in 1994.

Singh then recounted a quote by Tharman in an interview with Mothership before his victory in the 2023 Presidential Elections: "He said in response to his conviction that, I quote: 'They got the wrong man.' Unquote."

Singh went on to state that "a criminal conviction does not negate one's right to assert innocence."

"My conscience will always be clear in so far as my conviction on both charges in concerned," said Singh.

However, Singh reiterated that he took full responsibility for not responding quickly enough to correct Raeesah's lie.

"I should have done better in balancing the need to be sensitive to Raeesah for the reason she gave for lying to Parliament on the one hand, and resolving the matter of a lie in Parliament as soon as possible."

Has never assumed that the LO appointment is a given

In response to the resolution that his continuation as LO would "undermine public confidence in the integrity of Singapore's political system, amongst other things," Singh pointed out that the role of LO is determined by the government of the day.

"I have never operated on the assumption that the Leader of the Opposition appointment is a given, nor have I hankered for it. I have done my best to work with my colleagues to advance the interests of Singaporeans with the Workers' Party as a responsible opposition through the office."

He therefore rejected the resolution.

Lastly, Singh took the stance that no action should be taken against Lim and Faisal as he "does not agree with the judgement and the findings of the COP".

He also cited former WP secretary-general and de facto LO Low Thia Khiang's description of Singh:

"The future we envisage for Singapore does not call for the destruction of the stable and sensible politics Singaporeans seek to uphold in Singapore, and that makes resolution six of the motion, unobjectionable.

In fact, my predecessor, Mr. Low Thia Khiang, after giving evidence at my trial, said to the media, and I quote, 'The voters can make a distinction between who is a good politician and who is not a good politician. And I believe Pritam Singh is a good politician. He is a capable, competent leader with a heart for Singapore and Singaporeans', unquote."

Singh clarified that he does not undertake his political work for such testimonies, and he remains grateful for the support of Singaporeans.

He concluded his speech with this:

"Whatever Parliament decides, and as long as I am a Member of Parliament, I will continue my work as an MP on the ground in Aljunied GRC, and I will continue to advocate for Singaporeans in Parliament, to the best of my abilities, as I have for the last 15 years.

For the Workers' Party and to my fellow Singaporeans, we press on, and we continue working for Singapore."

Top photos via MDDI/YouTube & Canva