- Pritam Singh has been struck off the rolls by the Court of Three Judges, marking a significant conclusion to the five-year saga stemming from Raeesah Khan's false anecdote in parliament.
- The court's decision to strike Singh off was described as an inevitable and open and shut case, given the established thresholds for dishonesty-related offences.
- Singh, a non-practising lawyer, did not contest the application for his disbarment, which was legally required after his conviction for giving false evidence.
- The saga began in August 2021 when Khan told a false anecdote about a sexual assault survivor, which she later admitted was a lie.
- After a trial, Singh was found guilty of lying under oath and fined S$14,000 (US$10,900).
- Singh's appeal against the conviction was dismissed in December 2025.
- Singh is the third lawyer to be disbarred in 2026.
- The Committee of Privileges investigated Khan's falsehood, hearing evidence from Singh and other WP leaders in December 2021.
- Political analysts noted that the conclusion of this saga brings closure for the public and emphasizes the importance of honesty in politics.
- The disbarment is not expected to significantly affect Singh's political career, as he has been focused on his role in the Workers' Party.
Pritam Singh, the Workers' Party chief, has been disbarred by the Law Society of Singapore, concluding a five-year saga that began with Raeesah Khan's false testimony in parliament. The disbarment follows Singh's conviction for perjury, where he was found guilty of lying under oath regarding Khan's false claims about a police incident.1510
The saga started in August 2021 when Khan fabricated a story about accompanying a sexual assault survivor to a police station. After initially denying the falsehood, she admitted to lying in November 2021. Singh's involvement led to his conviction and a fine of S$14,000 (US$10,900), with his appeal dismissed in December 2025.46
Political analysts have described the disbarment as an “open and shut” case, with many believing it was a necessary step for closure. SMU Associate Professor Eugene Tan noted that while this brings relief, it remains a burden for Singh and the Workers' Party. Dr Mustafa emphasized that the disbarment is unlikely to impact Singh's political career significantly, as he has been focused on his role in the party.29
The case has highlighted the importance of honesty in politics, with Assistant Professor Benjamin Joshua Ong stating, “The message is clear that honesty, even in matters that seem small, matters.” The public perception of Singh and the Workers' Party remains resilient, with the party still viewed as a viable opposition force despite the reputational damage.
“Singh, a non-practising lawyer, did not contest the application, and both he and Lam were represented by Senior Counsel Chelva Rajah. The court's decision leaves no more 'loose ends', but Singh can seek reinstatement after a significantly longer period than five years.”
