EXCHANGES BETWEEN RAEESAH KHAN AND PARTY LEADERS
The prosecution is also relying on WhatsApp messages and emails that Ms Khan exchanged with Singh and other party leaders to support its case.
During a parliament sitting on Oct 4, 2021, Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam made a statement in which he asked Ms Khan for more details so that her claim about the police mishandling a sexual assault case could be investigated.
According to the prosecution, while the minister was speaking, Ms Khan sent Singh a message asking for guidance, writing: “What should I do, Pritam”. Both were in the chamber of parliament at the time.
Singh did not respond to Ms Khan’s message until after she had replied to the minister, saying that she could not provide further details because of confidentiality but confirming her anecdote again.
Singh then replied to Ms Khan asking her to speak after the parliament sitting. They met at about 11.15pm that evening with Ms Lim, chair of the WP.
According to the prosecution, Singh and Ms Lim advised Ms Khan to get legal advice, but neither asked Ms Khan why she had lied again, nor told her that she had to clarify the lie.
“Ms Khan, however, told them that perhaps there was another way – to tell the truth. The prosecution’s case is that (Singh) told her it was too late for that,” argued Mr Ang.
On Oct 7, 2021, the police sent Ms Khan an email requesting to interview her about her anecdote. Ms Khan forwarded this email to Singh, Ms Lim and Mr Faisal, and asked them for advice.
According to the prosecution, Ms Khan did not receive a reply from the party leaders, and up until Oct 11, 2021, none of them instructed Ms Khan to clarify her lie with the police or in parliament.
At a meeting on Oct 12, 2021, Singh and Ms Lim explained to Ms Khan that the issue of the anecdote would not go away, and she should clarify the lie in parliament, according to the prosecution.
From then until Oct 31, 2021, she prepared several drafts of her clarificatory statement, in consultation with Singh, Ms Lim and her aides Ms Loh and Mr Nathan.
PARTY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS
The prosecution’s opening statement also detailed internal disciplinary proceedings that the WP undertook in relation to Ms Khan’s conduct.
An urgent meeting of the WP’s central executive committee (CEC) took place on Oct 29, 2021 to inform CEC members of the clarification Ms Khan was going to make.
Mr Ang told the court that the CEC was not informed that Singh had known about the lie “from as early as” Aug 7, 2021, nor that Ms Lim and Mr Faisal were informed on Aug 8, 2021, nor that Singh and Ms Khan met on Oct 3, 2021 to discuss what to do about the lie.
After Ms Khan delivered her clarification in parliament on Nov 1, 2021, Mr Low contacted Singh and recommended that the WP form a disciplinary panel to look into the matter, said the prosecutor.
A disciplinary panel comprising Singh, Ms Lim and Mr Faisal was convened on Nov 2, 2021, and met Ms Khan as well as WP members.
At one such meeting, several WP members, including prosecution witnesses Ms Loh and Mr Nathan, raised their concern that the panel itself had to take responsibility for “the way they had guided Ms Khan in the matter”, Mr Ang said.
On Nov 30, 2021, Ms Khan informed Singh of her intention to resign as a WP member and MP. The CEC met again and ultimately voted to expel Ms Khan from the party if she did not resign.
The WP held a press conference on Dec 2, 2021 – the first day that the COP was hearing oral evidence from witnesses including Ms Khan and Ms Loh.
“(Singh) would have known that his own role in the matter would have been revealed by Ms Khan and/or Ms Loh when they testified before the COP,” said Mr Ang.
At this press conference, Singh stated publicly for the first time that the WP had known about Ms Khan’s lie about a week after she first told the anecdote of the sexual assault case in parliament.
The penalties Singh faces are a maximum jail term of three years, a fine of up to S$7,000 (US$5,360), or both per charge.
The Attorney-General’s Chambers had previously said that the prosecution would seek a fine for each charge if Singh is convicted.
Under the Constitution, anyone fined at least S$10,000 or jailed for at least a year is disqualified from standing for election to become an MP.
A sitting MP who receives such penalties will lose their seat. The disqualification lasts for five years.
Experts previously told CNA that the outcome for Singh depends on the reading of the Constitution.
If both charges are taken together to be an offence, the cumulative maximum fine of S$14,000 could disqualify him as an MP and from standing in the next election.
After admitting to her lie, Ms Khan resigned from the WP and as an MP, and was given a S$35,000 fine on the COP’s recommendations.
The trial continues, with Ms Khan set to take the stand on Monday.
