Pritam Singh’s disbarment marks likely end of long-running Raeesah Khan saga, say analysts
The time and public resources directed at the saga symbolise that upholding honesty in politics matters, even when it comes at some cost, one political analyst said.
Workers’ Party secretary-general Pritam Singh arrives for his disciplinary hearing called by the Law Society of Singapore on Aug 13, 2026. (Photo: CNA/Wallace Woon)
New: You can now listen to articles.
This audio is generated by an AI tool.
Read a summary of this article on FAST.
Get bite-sized news via a new
cards interface. Give it a try.
Click here to return to FAST
Tap here to return to FAST
FAST
SINGAPORE: The disbarment of Workers’ Party (WP) chief Pritam Singh on Thursday (Aug 13) marks the likely end of a saga that has lasted five years since the opposition party’s former Member of Parliament Raeesah Khan told a false anecdote in parliament, political analysts said.
While the proceedings to strike Mr Singh off the rolls were “inevitable” and an “open and shut” case, analysts told CNA the conclusion of the entire episode brings closure for members of the public.
People are likely to have formed their own views of the saga by now, with one political analyst stating that Singaporeans looking back at the case in its entirety will see the importance of honesty in politics.
Assistant Professor Benjamin Joshua Ong of the Singapore Management University (SMU) said: “The message is clear that honesty, even in matters that seem small, matters.
Guess Word
Crack the word, one row at a time
Buzzword
Create words using the given letters
Mini Sudoku
Tiny puzzle, mighty brain teaser
Mini Crossword
Small grid, big challenge
Word Search
Spot as many words as you can
“Even as upholding this principle has been important, there has been a cost, in terms of parliamentary time and the courts’ time, which have been diverted from other pressing issues.”
SMU Associate Professor Eugene Tan said “it’s a relief of sorts for (Mr Singh) that there can now be closure”, while adding that this is still something he and the WP must live with “for the foreseeable future”.
Mr Singh’s perjury before the Committee of Privileges (COP) has now been dealt with by parliament, the courts, the WP and the disciplinary tribunal for lawyers, said Assoc Prof Tan.
In July, Leader of the House Indranee Rajah also said that a time bar meant no further action was necessary by parliament against WP leaders Sylvia Lim and Faisal Manap, whom the COP also found had lied under oath.
With the court’s decision on Thursday, there appear to be no more “loose ends” to be addressed, said Dr Mustafa Izzuddin, senior international affairs analyst at consultancy Solaris Strategies Singapore.
WHAT THE SAGA SYMBOLISES
The long-running saga started in August 2021 after Ms Khan told parliament a false anecdote about accompanying a sexual assault survivor to a police station where officers mishandled the case. She admitted this to Mr Singh a few days later.
Ms Khan doubled down on the falsehood in an October parliament sitting, before admitting to lying in November 2021. The COP set up to investigate her heard evidence from Mr Singh and other WP leaders and cadres in December 2021.
After a trial, a court found Mr Singh guilty of lying under oath when he told the COP that he had wanted her to come clean, and fined him S$14,000 (US$10,900). His appeal was dismissed in December 2025.
SMU’s Asst Prof Ong said the takeaway from the five-year-long affair was that upholding honesty is important even if it comes at some cost.
He expressed hope that on both sides of the aisle, parliament can continue doing its best to serve Singaporeans and tackle the challenges of the day.
He also said what Ms Khan did was wrong, even though she had been trying to draw attention to “the important issue of how society, including those in authority, treats those who have experienced (or claim to have experienced) sexual offences”.
“I trust and hope that, as the ‘saga’ involving MPs comes to an end, Singaporeans will continue to bear in mind and consider this and other important matters with concern, carefulness, and rigour,” he said.
Independent political observer Dr Felix Tan said many Singaporeans were “probably ready to move on” from the episode.
“That said, there will inevitably be some who see the entire episode as having become unnecessarily politicised or politically charged. Ultimately, much will depend on how the public views the proportionality of the outcome.”
Dr Mustafa said there was obvious “political fatigue” with regard to Mr Singh’s case, and that it was “time for this chapter to be closed, and for other chapters to be opened”.
POLITICAL IMPACT ON MR SINGH
Given that Mr Singh, a non-practising lawyer, has been focused on his political service, the disbarment is not expected to affect his career and income, and his attention going forward will be on the WP and his constituents, said Dr Mustafa.
SMU’s Assoc Prof Tan said that Singaporeans have long come to their own views on the saga and its protagonists, including the WP and the People’s Action Party.
“The public has very much decided on (Mr Singh) so I don’t see today’s case affecting him in any significant way. To be sure, it is another reputational hit and damaging to his political brand, which he would rather not have,” said the law don.
He added that for the WP, the “silver lining of being the leading opposition party has been one constant since the saga began”.
“The WP still maintains its cachet as the only viable opposition party for now and that means the impact of this long-drawn saga is somewhat cushioned.
“The WP will have to be even more careful not to be involved in another political blunder for this parliamentary term”, he added.
Independent observer Dr Tan noted that Mr Singh continues to command considerable support and respect among his supporters and constituents.
The entire saga is unlikely to fundamentally change that, he said.
STRAIGHTFORWARD CASE
As for Thursday’s hearing itself, Dr Tan said Mr Singh’s disbarment was “more or less already a foregone conclusion”, while SMU’s Assoc Prof Tan described the disciplinary hearing as an “open and shut” case.
Mr Singh, 50, did not contest the Law Society of Singapore’s (LawSoc) application for a disciplinary tribunal to strike him off the rolls.
LawSoc was legally required to seek disciplinary measures after Mr Singh’s conviction on two counts of giving false evidence to the COP investigating Ms Khan.
SMU’s Asst Prof Ong said Mr Singh probably conceded because “he knew the law, which is that a lawyer who commits dishonesty-related offences will almost invariably be struck off”.
Dr Mustafa agreed that the outcome was “inevitable” because the thresholds for being struck off are clearly established.
He added that Mr Singh can seek reinstatement to the rolls. “But I understand the procedure can be quite onerous, and the threshold is pretty high, and it takes a significantly longer period of time,” he said.
Asst Prof Ong pointed to the case of lawyer Glenn Knight, the first head of the Commercial Affairs Department, who was struck off the rolls in 1994 after a cheating conviction.
Mr Knight applied to be reinstated to the rolls in 2007 and returned to practising the law in his early 60s.
Source: CNA/dv
Sign up for our newsletters
Get the CNA app
Stay updated with notifications for breaking news and our best stories
Get WhatsApp alerts
Join our channel for the top reads for the day on your preferred chat app
Get bite-sized news via a new
cards interface. Give it a try.
Click here to return to FAST
Tap here to return to FAST
FAST
About The Author
