'Dishonourable & unbecoming of an MP': Summary of Indranee's 40-minute speech on Pritam Singh's suitability as Leader of the Opposition

The Singapore Parliament heard Leader of the House Indranee Rajah's motion to consider Workers' Party (WP) chief Pritam Singh unsuitable to continue as Leader of the Opposition (LO) on Jan. 14, following his court conviction in the Raeesah Khan case in 2025.

She previously filed the parliamentary motion on Jan. 9.

Indranee touched on Singh’s role in advising former party member Raeesah Khan to lie, the standards expected of the LO, WP’s slow response in tackling this case, as well as the need to uphold honesty and integrity to maintain public trust in Singapore's political system.

Here's a summary of her lengthy speech, which spanned 40 minutes.

Honesty and integrity are the foundation of public trust

Indranee commenced her speech by taking audiences back to four and a half years ago:

"Mr Speaker, we are here today because a lie was told in this Chamber four and a half 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 described Singh's misconduct as "not trivial", adding that it involves several lies to different individuals at different points in time, as well as guiding a junior Member of Parliament (MP) to "do the wrong thing" and his failure in his leadership responsibilites.

She stated that honesty and integrity are not "optional virtues" or "abstract ideals" in the Singapore government, but rather "the foundation of public trust".

As such, if Singh continues as LO, it would "undermine the standing of Parliament and public confidence in the integrity of Singapore's political system".

"When a Member of Parliament (“MP”) lies to Parliament or before its committees, this is not just a personal lapse or a tactical misjudgment. It strikes at the trust Singaporeans place in us, as well as the solemn duty we owe to the people we serve."

This, she stated, was the reason why she filed the motion.

Parliament not being asked to impose penalties or sanctions on Singh

The motion seeks 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.

However, Indranee was also quick to clarify that the motion does not seek to impose any penalties or sanctions on Singh under the Parliament (Privileges, Immunities and Powers) Act of 1962 (PPIPA).

"What is being asked is for the House to express a view of his conduct, and if the House agrees that such conduct is not acceptable, to express its regret at such conduct."

The motion does not operate to remove the LO, Indranee highlighted.

As it was the Prime Minister who designated the LO, the decision on whether Singh should continue as LO rests with him, not Parliament, Indranee affirmed.

Background to the Raeesah Khan case

On Feb. 17, 2025, the judge convicted Singh on both charges under the PPIPA.

The first is for claiming that he wanted Khan to clarify her lie in parliament at some point.

The second is for telling the Committee of Privileges that he had advised Raeesah to come clean in parliament.

The judge found Singh guilty of falsely testifying to the COP that when he spoke to Raeesah on Oct. 3, 2021, he wanted her to admit to having lied to parliament two months earlier, about having accompanied a rape victim to a police station, if this issue were to come up in parliament on Oct 4, 2021.

He had appealed against his conviction, but this was eventually dismissed on Dec. 4, 2025.

These are Singh's dishonesties, as summarised by Indranee:

• Singh guided Raeesah, twice, to maintain her untruth to Parliament,
• He then lied twice before the COP,
• He lied before the court,
• He lied to the public, and
• He concealed material information from his own party.

"Failure of leadership"

This case "shows a failure of leadership" on Singh's part.

Indranee said that had Singh told Raeesah to come clean when she told him in 2021 that she had lied in Parliament, "the entire matter would have taken a very different course".

She added that Raeesah had sought Singh's advice as she viewed him as both her party leader and mentor.

However, Singh told her to hide the truth and to continue with the falsehood instead, she said. If he had not done so, "the consequences would have been nowhere as grave".

Indranee subsequently compared Singh to former WP secretary-general and de facto LO Low Thia Khiang.

"It is precisely at such moments where leaders are tested, and leadership matters. And we have seen the contrast between Mr Singh’s approach and Mr Low Thia Khiang’s leadership."

"Strange that the WP could act so decisively in the cases of Ms Khan and Mr Perera"

"The conduct and conviction of Mr Singh reflect directly on Parliament," Indranee stated, adding that since his conviction, Singh has failed to show "any remorse, accountability, or acceptance of responsibility".

She also questioned the time taken by WP to decide on its course of action with regard to Singh.

When Raeesah admitted in Parliament that she had lied, a disciplinary panel was formed within 24 hours to look into the matter, Indranee noted.

Recommendations were also made and accepted by the WP Central Executive Committee (CEC) within the month, she added.

Indranee also brought up the case of Leon Perera.

She stated that following the release of video evidence on Jul. 17, 2023 regarding his extra-marital affair, Singh met with him and the WP’s CEC also convened to discuss the matter — all on the same day.

Perera resigned two days later, and it was revealed that he would have been expelled from WP had he not done so.

With these two cases in mind, Indranee called out how swiftly WP handled them, as opposed to Singh's case.

"It is strange that the WP could act so decisively in the cases of Ms Khan and Mr Perera – where there were no Court findings on their conduct. Yet now, in a far graver case of dishonesty and lying, it needs four months to figure out the import of the Court’s clear judgment of Mr Singh."

Unsuitability as Leader of the Opposition

Indranee said the office of the LO was created to "recognise Singaporeans’ strong desire for a greater diversity of views in our politics, and to enable our political system to evolve in a way that maintains our sense of national purpose."

Singh was first appointed to the role by then-Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong in 2020, and was again designated as LO by Prime Minister Lawrence Wong following the 2025 General Election.

The LO’s responsibilities include leading the opposition in:

• Presenting alternative views during parliamentary debates on policies, bills and motions.
• Scrutinising the government’s positions and actions in Parliament.
• Nominating opposition members for appointment to Select Committees.

"The LO is not an ordinary MP", Indranee noted.

The position carries important duties and privileges, Indranee said, adding that its holder has to be respected and trusted "as a competent representative of the people".

She described Singh's conduct as "dishonourable and unbecoming of an MP", adding that he had "fallen short of the requirements and standards expected of an LO".

Moreover, she said, WP MPs have often made speeches in Parliament emphasising the importance of accountability, and have also "declared it their mission to hold the government to account".

"The question is whether they believe that their own members – including their leader – should also be held to account for doing something wrong, especially after the Court has convicted them of a crime."

PAP MPs held to similar standards

Indranee highlighted that the same standards of honourability and rigour apply to People's Action Party MPs as well.

If a PAP MP or political officeholder is found guilty of lying or dishonesty, "nobody doubts that serious consequences will follow".

She cited previous instances — in 1999, PAP MP Choo Wee Khiang was charged for cheating, and he resigned before pleading guilty.

Tan Chuan Jin resigned over matters related to propriety & personal conduct in 2023.

Meanwhile, S Iswaran resigned in 2024 as soon as he was charged with corruption and obstructing justice.

Honesty and integrity are "non-negotiable"

Before concluding her speech, Indranee emphasised that "this matter goes beyond party politics".

She once again reiterated that honesty and integrity are "non-negotiable", describing them as the foundation of Singapore's political system and good governance.

She warned that if Parliament allowed those standards to slip, "distrust will gradually take root, and public confidence in our institutions will be eroded, inevitably and irreversibly".

By supporting the motion, she added, MPs would signal their determination to prevent such a mistake from happening again, and to continue to uphold the high standards that have served Singapore well.

Top photos via MDDI