Key Summary:
On October 15, 2024, the trial of Pritam Singh, Secretary-General of Singapore’s Workers’ Party, continued with former MP Raeesah Khan facing tough questions from the defense about her communications with two WP cadres concerning a meeting with party leaders. Khan expressed surprise over the WP leadership’s November 2021 decision to subject her to a disciplinary hearing. She also provided an explanation for why she eventually chose to inform the Committee of Privileges about the party leaders’ awareness of her falsehood, reversing her earlier stance. As the first witness called to testify, Khan’s testimony carried on into the following day. Scheduled to testify subsequently are former WP Secretary-General Low Thia Khiang and two former cadre members.
| Daily Update of the Pritam Singh Trial – October 15, 2024 |
18:03
Judge to Review Grounds for Impeachment of Raeesah Khan
Deputy Principal District Judge Luke Tan is set to determine if there are sufficient grounds to support Mr. Andre Jumabhoy’s application to impeach Ms. Raeesah Khan as a witness. Following this decision, the court has adjourned for the day, with the trial scheduled to resume tomorrow.
17:39
Prosecution refutes defence’s claims of inconsistencies in Raeesah Khan’s testimony
The Deputy Attorney-General (DAG) Ang counters the defence’s assertions regarding inconsistencies in Ms. Raeesah Khan’s testimony, arguing that they lack material significance. He states, “I’m not sure why this is material at all. The simple point is that this e-mail speaks for itself; all of us can read it.”
DAG Ang emphasises that Ms. Khan has consistently maintained that she did not interpret the e-mail as an instruction. He dismisses the focus on whether it was a “dig” or if she felt fear as irrelevant, insisting that these details do not pertain to the core issues at hand.
He concludes by asserting that it is unnecessary to pursue an impeachment procedure over matters that are not truly material, which heightens the tension in the courtroom as both legal teams engage in a heated discussion.
17:30
Defence claims grounds to impeach Raeesah Khan’s testimony
During the proceedings, Mr. Andre Jumabhoy requests that Ms. Raeesah Khan be removed from the courtroom. He focuses on her conflicting accounts regarding an e-mail sent by Pritam Singh to Workers’ Party (WP) MPs on Oct 1, 2021. In this e-mail, Singh emphasised the importance of defending statements made in Parliament, highlighting the risk of being summoned by the Committee of Privileges for failure to do so.
Just before her removal, Ms. Khan reiterated that she did not view the e-mail as a prompt to clarify her lie. Instead, she described it as a “dig” at her and a means to appease the other WP MPs.
Mr. Jumabhoy points out that Ms. Khan had previously told the police that the e-mail instilled fear in her, particularly regarding the possibility of her untruth being addressed in the upcoming Oct 4, 2021, Parliamentary session. He argues that these two accounts are “materially different,” suggesting inconsistencies that may undermine her credibility as a witness.
17:26
Raeesah Khan clarifies that Singh’s e-mail wasn’t a directive to come clean
Mr. Andre Jumabhoy questions Ms. Raeesah Khan about an e-mail sent by Pritam Singh to the Workers’ Party on Oct 1, 2021, reminding members about Parliamentary protocol and the consequences of not defending what is said in Parliament, which could lead to being summoned before the Committee of Privileges. This e-mail came just days before Ms. Khan’s next Parliamentary sitting.
Mr. Jumabhoy asks if she saw the e-mail as a suggestion that she needed to admit to her lie. Ms. Khan disagrees, explaining that there is a difference between an e-mail sent to everyone to show Singh’s stance on the matter and a direct message to her telling her to come clean. She emphasises, “Sharing a consequence is not a directive.”
Ms. Khan had previously testified on Oct 14, 2024, that she felt the e-mail was a “dig” at her. Mr. Jumabhoy suggests that she might feel this way because she was the only one who had shared an unsubstantiated anecdote.
He presses her again, asking if the e-mail was a subtle “nudge” for her to tell the truth before the Parliamentary session. Ms. Khan denies this, reiterating that she viewed it as Singh wanting to demonstrate to the party that he was taking the matter seriously.
17:04
Defence claims Raeesah and WP aides decided to bury lie before meeting leaders
Resuming cross-examination after a short break, Mr. Andre Jumabhoy suggests that Ms. Raeesah Khan, along with WP aides Ms. Loh Pei Ying and Mr. Yudhishthra Nathan, had already agreed on Aug 7, 2021, to continue the lie before their meeting with Workers’ Party leaders the following day. Ms. Khan denies this, insisting that they had decided to wait and see how the party leaders would respond.
Ms. Khan clarifies that when she said “they’ve agreed” in her WhatsApp message, she was referring to the leaders agreeing to “take her untruth to the grave.” Mr. Jumabhoy then asks if she meant that the leaders had aligned with the position the three of them had taken to bury the lie. At this point, the judge interjects, stating that the question was unfair, as Ms. Khan had already provided her explanation.
16:32
Defence questions if Raeesah Khan sent Aug 8 message to WP cadres
Mr. Jumabhoy, Singh’s lawyer, casts doubt on whether Ms. Raeesah Khan actually sent the Aug 8, 2021 WhatsApp message to WP cadres Ms. Loh Pei Ying and Mr. Yudhishthra Nathan, where she claimed the WP leaders had agreed to “take the information to the grave.” He notes the lack of any reaction from the cadres, suggesting that the message may never have been sent.
This point arises after the prosecution seeks clarification on whether the defence believes the message was never sent. While the judge interjects, pointing out that the message was found on Mr. Nathan’s phone, Mr. Jumabhoy emphasises the absence of any response from the cadres. The judge then notes that there could be many reasons why they didn’t react and moves the discussion forward.
16:10
Raeesah Khan questioned on rapid succession of texts
Mr. Jumabhoy questions the speed at which Ms. Raeesah Khan sent two text messages in rapid succession to her aides, casting doubt on her claim that she managed to do so within seconds. He refers to a message she sent to Ms. Loh and Mr. Nathan stating she had met with Pritam Singh, Sylvia Lim, and Faisal Manap, where they supposedly agreed to “take the information to the grave.” This was followed by another lengthy text about a draft statement on Muslim issues just two seconds later.
“How is this done in two seconds?” Mr. Jumabhoy asks, counting aloud, “One, two.”
Ms. Khan responds, “Maybe my messages were sent late, or I don’t know… but I don’t have magic or anything like that,” adding that she had a draft saved on her phone. When further pressed, she explains that making a quick edit to a draft would be possible in a matter of seconds.
15:44
Defence questions Raeesah Khan’s new details added after three years
Mr. Jumabhoy continues challenging Ms. Raeesah Khan’s account of the August 8, 2021 meeting with Workers’ Party (WP) leaders, pointing out that her mention of Ms. Sylvia Lim asking if her father was waiting for her after the meeting was not brought up during the Committee of Privileges (COP) hearing.
Ms. Khan responds that she cannot recall whether she mentioned this during her police interview following the COP hearing, as the event took place three years ago.
“You seem to be adding new things three years after the event,” Mr. Jumabhoy states.
At this point, the judge interjects, suggesting that Ms. Khan might have added details based on the questions asked in court. The judge advises that unless Ms. Khan was asked the same questions at the COP hearing, the defence’s point may not be entirely relevant.
15:24
Defence highlights inconsistencies in Raeesah Khan’s accounts of the August 8 meeting
Mr. Jumabhoy confronts Ms. Raeesah Khan over her differing versions of events during the August 8, 2021, meeting with Workers’ Party leaders, presented at two separate Committee of Privileges hearings.
He notes that on December 2, 2021, Ms. Khan testified that she was told to maintain her false narrative unless further pressed. However, on December 22, she stated that she was told to “take the lie to the grave.” Mr. Jumabhoy argues these are “fundamentally different” accounts.
Ms. Khan defends herself, saying, “I think I was just giving more information at the second hearing.” She also disputes the claim that her accounts were different, explaining that she assumed the lie would be “taken to the grave” since the anecdote was not expected to resurface.
“For me, it’s hard to think about it as different,” she adds, underscoring her perspective that the two recounts were not contradictory.
15:15
Raeesah admits she would have continued the lie if not pressed at COP
During the cross-examination, Mr. Jumabhoy brings up Ms. Raeesah Khan’s testimony from the Committee of Privileges (COP) hearing on December 2, 2021, where she maintained her false narrative instead of coming clean.
He asks Ms. Khan if the Workers’ Party (WP) leadership had advised her to stick to her falsehood as long as she wasn’t pressed further at the COP. Ms. Khan agrees.
Mr. Jumabhoy then presses further: “So what would happen if you were pressed?”
Ms. Khan replies, “I don’t know,” recalling a conversation with Pritam Singh on October 3, 2021, where he had told her that if the issue came up again, he would not judge her for continuing with the lie.
When asked if she would have chosen a different course of action if pressed, Ms. Khan says: “At that point in time, yes.”
14:53
Raeesah tells court that teammates did not tell her to come clean
Mr. Jumabhoy continues the cross-examination by questioning Ms. Raeesah Khan about a Zoom call she had with Ms. Loh Pei Ying and Mr. Yudhishthra Nathan on August 7, 2021.
Ms. Khan testifies that although they discussed her sexual assault during the call, neither Ms. Loh nor Mr. Nathan asked her about the truth of her anecdote. However, she voluntarily admitted to them that the story she shared in Parliament was not true.
When asked what Pritam Singh knew at the time, Ms. Khan says she cannot remember what she told her teammates.
Mr. Jumabhoy asks how they reacted when she confessed to lying in Parliament. Ms. Khan replies, “I think they were surprised, maybe, and disappointed.”
When pressed on what advice they gave her, she says, “They told me to see what Pritam Singh would do.”
Mr. Jumabhoy further asks if they urged her to come forward with the truth, to which Ms. Khan responds, “No.”
14:44
Raeesah Khan came forward with the truth only because Pritam would not let it go: Defence
The trial resumes around 2:30 PM, with Mr. Jumabhoy arguing that Ms. Raeesah Khan only came forward with the truth to Pritam Singh due to his persistence, rather than because she was “feeling unsettled.”
“You told him the truth because he wouldn’t let it go, wasn’t it?” Mr. Jumabhoy asks.
Ms. Khan agrees, stating that she was very worried the truth would come out and that it was causing her anxiety. She adds, “I feel like I could have continued lying, but I chose to make that phone call to him.”
Mr. Jumabhoy further suggests that Singh had to ask her “point blank whether the anecdote was true” and that she did not volunteer the information herself. Ms. Khan agrees, reiterating that she felt compelled to tell Singh the truth.
12:50
Court breaks for lunch
The court has adjourned for lunch and will reconvene at 2:30 PM, at which point the defence will continue its cross-examination of Ms. Raeesah Khan.
12:42
Defence asks Raeesah: Is that how you treat somebody you revere?
After listing the lies Ms. Raeesah Khan had told Pritam Singh about her anecdote, Mr. Andre Jumabhoy asks if she had been “lying to (Singh) barefaced.”
When Ms. Khan affirms this, he references her previous statement about looking up to and revering Singh. “He was a mentor to you,” Mr. Jumabhoy asserts. “So that for you is how you treat somebody you revere?”
Ms. Khan responds by explaining that she was “really scared” at the time, admitting that she was so afraid of disappointing Singh that she allowed her lies to snowball. “I would never do something like that again, but yeah, you’re right,” she acknowledges.
12:36
‘Lie heaped upon a lie’ – Defence says Raeesah Khan managed to lie four times in one text
Mr. Andre Jumabhoy accuses Ms. Raeesah Khan of constructing a series of lies, stating, “So it’s a lie heaped upon a lie, and it’s going to be wrapped up in more lies, isn’t it?” This comment refers to a text message she sent to Pritam Singh regarding details about the victim she claimed to have accompanied to the police station.
Mr. Jumabhoy points out that she did not meet the victim at the bus stop or near the Bedok police station. “In one message, I think you’ve managed to lie about four times. I mean, that’s pretty impressive by any stretch of the imagination,” he asserts.
“I wouldn’t call it impressive; I would call it fear,” Ms. Khan replies.
He contends that she is “seen to be well thinking enough” to add facts to support her accounts. Ms. Khan responds, “I would think being well thinking would be coming out with the truth.”
12:17
Defence accuses Raeesah Khan of being a liar
The defence team focuses on Ms. Raeesah Khan’s understanding of the word “substantiate” during the cross-examination, arguing that she does know its meaning, contrary to her statements to the Committee of Privileges.
“So the answer that you gave to the Committee of Privileges was not true, correct?” Mr. Andre Jumabhoy asks.
“It was true to me at the time,” Ms. Khan responds.
Mr. Jumabhoy presses on, stating, “We can keep going all day. You are in fact a liar, correct?”
“Yes, I lied,” Ms. Khan acknowledges.
“You tell lies non-stop, don’t you?” he continues.
Ms. Khan maintains her composure, replying, “No.”
12:13
Raeesah understood Pritam Singh had meant she had to prove she had accompanied the victim to the police station
During cross-examination, Mr. Andre Jumabhoy persistently questions Ms. Raeesah Khan regarding her understanding of the term “substantiate,” with Ms. Khan maintaining that she did not grasp its meaning as intended by Pritam Singh.
Singh had circled a part of the anecdote she delivered in Parliament on August 3, 2021, and written “substantiate” next to it.
The lawyer asks if she understood the term to mean “make sure that (the anecdote) is true,” to which Ms. Khan responds affirmatively.
“Looking back now, I understand that it doesn’t make sense to not take the word seriously,” she acknowledges, adding that sexual assault survivors are often questioned “in an awkward way.”
“In this anecdote, you are not the survivor,” Mr. Jumabhoy points out, and Ms. Khan agrees with that statement.
When pressed further, Mr. Jumabhoy explains that being asked to substantiate in this context meant proving her presence at the police station.
“So you did understand what ‘substantiate’ means,” he concludes.
“Yes, yes, yes, yes,” Ms. Khan responds.
12:02
Defence questions Raeesah on events prior to her speech in Parliament
Mr. Andre Jumabhoy begins his cross-examination by questioning Ms. Raeesah Khan about her testimony that Pritam Singh had asked her to substantiate her anecdote before she delivered it in Parliament on August 3, 2021.
He inquires if she had anticipated being called out for the anecdote, to which Ms. Khan responds that she did not.
Mr. Jumabhoy then asks if she believed Singh should have taken the time to sit down with her and explain what he meant by writing “substantiate” on her draft. Ms. Khan asserts that she did not suggest he should have done so.
He emphasises that she was the only person aware of the lie and chose not to disclose it to Singh, describing her viewpoint as “somewhat myopic.”
“He simply didn’t know you would go and lie, did he?” Mr. Jumabhoy adds, highlighting her responsibility in the matter.
Additionally, he points out that Ms. Khan uploaded her speech late—only two days before the Parliament sitting—and notably left out the anecdote until the day before her delivery.
11:47
Trial Restarts, Raeesah Khan Takes the Stand
The defence, led by Mr. Andre Jumabhoy, begins its cross-examination of Ms. Raeesah Khan at approximately 11:45 a.m. on Oct 15, 2024. He starts with the anecdote that she shared in Parliament on Aug 3, 2021.
11:20
ICYMI: The Trial So Far
The prosecution this morning focused on events from November 2021, when Ms. Raeesah Khan was under investigation by the Workers’ Party’s (WP) disciplinary panel, which included party chief Pritam Singh, chairwoman Sylvia Lim, and vice-chair Faisal Manap.
During the first disciplinary panel meeting on Nov 8, 2021, party leaders criticised her conduct as an MP, noting that she was not active enough in Parliament and in the community. Ms. Khan expressed surprise at this reaction, as she was new to the role and had been on maternity leave for three months.
The panel also discussed her experience of “impostor syndrome” as a newly elected MP, but they did not clarify why her overall performance was being scrutinised during the meeting.
In messages presented as evidence in court, Ms. Khan informed WP cadre Yudhishthra Nathan that she would protect the reputation of the party and its leaders if she were investigated by the Committee of Privileges.
On Nov 22, 2021, Ms. Khan texted Singh to request another meeting, stating that she was unprepared for the disciplinary panel. However, she was instructed to send a formal e-mail request.
At the second disciplinary panel meeting on Nov 29, 2021, Ms. Khan felt that the party leaders had already “made up their mind” about her resignation, leaving her feeling “defeated and betrayed.”
11:05
Prosecution Finishes Questioning of Raeesah Khan
The prosecution has completed its questioning of Ms. Raeesah Khan, and the court has adjourned until 11:45 am.
When the hearing resumes, the defence will begin its cross-examination of Ms. Khan.
10:52
Raeesah Says She Discussed Resignation with Her Father
When asked about her decision to resign from the Workers’ Party (WP), Ms. Raeesah Khan expressed that she felt she had lost the support of the party leadership and her Sengkang team.
She told the court that she discussed her decision with her father, who advised her, “If you don’t have their support, then what’s the point?”
Ms. Khan added that Pritam Singh was the first person she called to inform him of her resignation on the afternoon of November 30, 2021.
She later met with members of the WP central executive committee to convey her decision. When the Deputy Public Prosecutor asked if any of the members had questions for her at that time, she replied no.
10:51
‘Defeated and Betrayed’ at Second Disciplinary Panel: Raeesah
When asked how she felt during the second disciplinary panel session on November 29, 2021, Ms. Raeesah Khan expressed that the Workers’ Party leaders had turned against her and used the disciplinary process to criticize her instead of for its intended purpose.
She stated that she felt “very defeated and betrayed” by the individuals she had looked up to and trusted the most.
According to Ms. Khan, the session was used to “almost pretend” that her party leaders had not been guiding her since their meeting at Pritam Singh’s house on August 8, 2021.
10:44
Raeesah Did Not Inform Other Panel Members That Pritam Singh Said He ‘Would Not Judge (Her)’
The Deputy Public Prosecutor asked Ms. Raeesah Khan whether, at the disciplinary meeting on November 29, 2021, she had informed Ms. Sylvia Lim and Mr. Faisal Manap that Pritam Singh had told her on October 3, 2021: “I will not judge you.” She replied no.
“I assumed that they talked to each other about everything,” she said, adding that she also believed Singh would have informed them about their October 3 meeting at her home, where he had assured her that there would be “no judgment” from him should she continue with the lie.
10:37
At Second Disciplinary Panel Meeting, Party Leaders Had Already ‘Made Up Their Mind’: Raeesah
At the second disciplinary meeting on November 29, 2021, which included Pritam Singh, Ms. Sylvia Lim, and Mr. Faisal Manap, Ms. Raeesah Khan stated that she shared her successes working in Compassvale and how she was working on her personal development.
However, she noted that they did not respond well. “I realised at the meeting that they had already made up their mind…for me to resign,” Ms. Khan said.
When pressed by the Deputy Public Prosecutor on what led her to that impression, she expressed that it felt as though they “were not really listening” and were not taking detailed notes.
10:35
Excerpt from Messages Between Raeesah and Her Team
In messages to Mr. Yudhishthra Nathan and Ms. Loh Pei Ying, Ms. Raeesah Khan expressed shock at the change in Pritam Singh’s response to her untruth.
She informed the court that Singh had told her that her decision to maintain the untruth when asked again in October 2021 was under review.
“What happened to ‘I won’t judge you?’” Mr. Nathan’s message read, referencing Singh’s earlier statement to Ms. Khan.
This exchange was also read out in court.
10:31
Raeesah Khan Texted Pritam Singh for Another Meeting with WP’s Panel, but Was Asked to Send E-Mail Request
During the proceedings, the Deputy Public Prosecutor read out a WhatsApp exchange between Pritam Singh and Ms. Raeesah Khan from November 22, 2021, which revealed Ms. Khan requesting another meeting with the disciplinary panel.
In her message, Ms. Khan indicated that she had not been prepared to discuss the topics raised during the November 8, 2021, meeting. She expressed a desire to share her positive experiences in the next meeting, as she told the DPP.
However, Mr. Singh instructed her to submit a request via email to the panel, stating that her unpreparedness was “unbecoming” of an MP.
“I didn’t understand where that came from,” Ms. Khan said, adding that she had not been informed that her performance as an MP would be reviewed during the November 8 meeting.
She expressed feeling that she had done herself a “disservice” by sharing her thoughts with Singh, only for him to “throw it back at (her).”
10:22
‘I Wanted to Protect Them,’ Raeesah Said in Messages to Yudhishthra Nathan
Following the disciplinary panel on November 8, 2021, Ms. Raeesah Khan sent messages to Mr. Yudhishthra Nathan and Ms. Loh Pei Ying, stating that Pritam Singh had told her “there is no point in (her) continuing” if she did not have the support of her immediate teammates in Sengkang GRC.
Mr. Nathan replied by asking her if Singh wanted her to resign, to which she responded, “I think he does.”
Mr. Nathan then remarked that Singh “gets off scot-free” since people are unaware that he knew Ms. Khan had lied. He added, “And my understanding is that even if you are no longer an MP, you would still have to go through the Committee of Privileges, where if they ask you about what the leaders knew and when, you could damage Pritam’s reputation if you reveal the truth.”
“I wouldn’t do that,” Ms. Khan replied, emphasising that she wanted to protect the party and its leaders while taking responsibility for what had transpired.
This exchange was read out in court as evidence.
10:12
Tenor of Meeting Was ‘Quite a Shock’: Raeesah on Nov 8, 2021, Disciplinary Panel
Ms. Raeesah Khan stated that she was unaware of how “substantial” the disciplinary panel meeting on November 8, 2021, would be and did not expect it to be “confronting.”
She recounted that the Workers’ Party leaders were on a stage at the party headquarters during the meeting. Given the series of events that led to her personal statement in Parliament on November 1, 2021, she had anticipated support from her party leaders and believed they would stand by her.
Judge Luke Tan inquired whether she noticed Ms. Lim writing and if it was not obvious that she was taking notes. Ms. Khan responded that she assumed it was informal note-taking and did not recall seeing anyone else taking notes. “I didn’t even register that she was taking notes and that these notes would become official in any way,” she said.
10:09
Raeesah Khan Says She Experienced “Impostor Syndrome” as a Newly-Elected MP
During the November 8, 2021, disciplinary panel meeting, Ms. Raeesah Khan revealed that her experience with “impostor syndrome” was also discussed. She explained that at the time, she believed it was normal for someone her age to feel like they “did not belong” or “did not deserve” their position.
Ms. Khan further mentioned that she informed the panel about her strong relationship with the residents of Compassvale, highlighting her participation in Meet-the-People Sessions and walkabouts.
She added that the disciplinary panel—comprising Pritam Singh, Sylvia Lim, and Faisal Manap—did not provide an explanation as to why her general performance as an MP was being raised during the meeting.
10:01
Raeesah Says Pritam Told Her She Was ‘On Borrowed Time’ If Allowed to Continue
Ms. Raeesah Khan testified in court that during the Workers’ Party disciplinary panel meeting, Pritam Singh criticized her for a lack of discipline and punctuality. He further remarked that she was “on borrowed time” if the party’s central executive committee allowed her to continue as an MP.
When questioned by the Deputy Public Prosecutor about her interpretation of Singh’s remark, Ms. Khan explained that she understood it to mean Singh believed she was likely to fail.
Ms. Khan also shared that, during party meetings, Singh had often told her she was not vocal enough. In response, she explained that she was the youngest person in those settings, and it was her first time in such an environment. She added that she was trying her best to observe and learn.
09:57
Raeesah Khan Says WP Disciplinary Panel Found Fault with Her Conduct as MP
Ms. Raeesah Khan testified that the Workers’ Party’s Disciplinary Panel not only scrutinized her actions regarding the Parliament incident but also questioned her overall conduct and personality as an MP.
Among the concerns raised were her perceived lack of submitted parliamentary questions and her limited presence in Parliament. The panel also questioned whether she had been sufficiently active on the ground in Sengkang.
Ms. Khan expressed surprise at this reaction, noting that she was new to the role and had been on maternity leave for three months. She emphasized that she had attended all her estate walks and Meet-the-People Sessions (MPS) unless something important came up. She added that any concerns about her parliamentary performance had not been raised prior to this meeting.
Ms. Khan also stated that during the panel meeting on November 8, 2021, Pritam Singh mentioned he had noted in her August 3, 2021 speech draft the need to substantiate her anecdote. WP chairwoman Sylvia Lim, meanwhile, questioned the late submission of her draft speech. However, no part of her untruth in Parliament was addressed during that panel meeting.
09:46
‘I Was Surprised That They Were Taking This Drastic Action’: Raeesah Khan on WP Disciplinary Panel
During the trial, Deputy Public Prosecutor Sivakumar Ramasamy asked Ms. Raeesah Khan if she had prior knowledge of the formation of the Workers’ Party (WP) disciplinary panel before November 2, 2021. She responded that she did not.
The DPP then read out an email dated November 2 from Ms. Sylvia Lim to Ms. Khan, informing her that the panel would be investigating the incident.
Ms. Khan expressed her surprise at the “formality” of the message, noting that WP leaders had been guiding her through the incident. “I was surprised that they were taking this drastic action,” she added.
09:38
Trial Starts
Ms. Raeesah Khan has taken the witness stand as the trial begins. Deputy Public Prosecutor Sivakumar Ramasamy starts by questioning her about the events that unfolded after she admitted to lying in Parliament on November 1, 2021.
09:10
Pritam Singh Arrives at Court
Workers’ Party secretary-general Pritam Singh arrived at the State Courts at around 9:05 AM, accompanied by his lawyer, Mr. Andre Jumabhoy.
09:00
What to Expect Today
Deputy Public Prosecutor Sivakumar Ramasamy has stated that he expects to complete his questioning of former Workers’ Party MP Raeesah Khan within the first two hours of the session. Following this, she is likely to be cross-examined by Pritam Singh’s defence lawyers.
Ms. Khan is the first of several witnesses who will give evidence during the 16-day trial, which is scheduled to conclude on November 13. Other key witnesses include former Workers’ Party secretary-general Low Thia Khiang, as well as former party cadres Loh Pei Ying and Yudhishthra Nathan.
08:50
Raeesah Khan Arrives at Court
Former Workers’ Party MP Raeesah Khan arrived at the State Courts at around 8:45 AM. She is expected to be cross-examined later today by the defence lawyers representing Pritam Singh, as his trial continues for a second day.
