SINGAPORE: Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh has apologised to the court for statements he made on the CNA programme The Assembly about a case where he was found guilty of lying to a parliamentary committee.<\/p>\n
In a Facebook post on Saturday (Dec 13), Pritam, who is WP chief, said: \u201cI accept that my statements may be construed to be in contempt of court, including to impugn the integrity, propriety or impartiality of the court.<\/p>\n
\u201cGiven that, I wholly and unreservedly apologise to the court and will avoid making comments to the same or similar effect in future.\u201d<\/p>\n
Mediacorp \u2013 CNA\u2019s parent company \u2013 has also apologised for and taken down the interview after being told by the Attorney-General\u2019s Chambers (AGC) that it was in contempt of court.<\/p>\n
The Ministry of Law (MinLaw) in a Dec 13 statement said Pritam \u2019s comments \u201care very wrong, and have no place in a system founded on the rule of law\u201d.<\/p>\n
The episode aired on Nov 5, a day after Pritam \u2019s appeal against his conviction was heard, with the court reserving its judgment. His appeal was later dismissed.<\/p>\n
When asked about the case on the programme, Pritam had said to neurodivergent interviewers that he believes the court of public opinion can be bigger than any court in the world.<\/p>\n
Pritam also said his party\u2019s respectable performance at the May general election showed what the public thought of his role in the saga resulting in Khan\u2019s resignation from Parliament. Khan had resigned in 2021 after admitting to giving a false anecdote in the House.<\/p>\n
He had also said that his political opponents will \u201cdo whatever it takes to lower my esteem and the esteem of my party in the public eye.\u201d<\/p>\n
MinLaw in its Dec 13 statement said Pritam \u2019s comments suggested that the prosecution against him by the AGC and, by extension, his conviction by the Magistrate\u2019s Court, were politically motivated – impugning the integrity of the court and legal system.<\/p>\n
It added that he had suggested that the court of public opinion, demonstrated by results at the May general election, was more important than the court\u2019s judgment.<\/p>\n
It reiterated Minister for Law Edwin Tong\u2019s previous statement that these comments denigrate the court\u2019s judgment and undermine public trust in the legal system and judiciary, which is \u201ccompletely unacceptable\u201d.<\/p>\n
It said that the AGC on Nov 28 had notified Pritam that his statements are in contempt of court, and invited him to apologise.<\/p>\n
The ministry added that it welcomes Pritam \u2019s comments made after the dismissal of his appeal that it is unacceptable for politicians to question or impugn the integrity of the courts.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe judiciary is a key pillar of Singapore\u2019s success, and it is critical that public trust in our justice system is maintained.\u201d<\/p>\n
Mediacorp, in a separate statement, said it accepts that the publication of the interview is in contempt of court.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe wholly and unreservedly apologise to the court. We have taken down the interview from our platforms and channels and will avoid publishing matters that are in contempt of court in future.\u201d<\/p>\n
CNA, in a report on Dec 13, said Mediacorp had been notified by the AGC that the interview was in contempt of court.<\/p>\n
It was recorded on July 26, 2025.<\/p>\n
Three days after it aired, Tong on Nov 8 criticised Mr Singh\u2019s statements, and said that his comment on the court of public opinion was outrageous, plainly wrong and completely unacceptable.<\/p>\n
Tong said then: \u201cMr Singh was investigated, and then he was charged. He went through a full and open trial and was convicted by the court for lying to a parliamentary select committee.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe judge gave detailed grounds setting out the basis for the conviction. I think it ran into almost 150 pages. This judgment is, today, valid and binding.\u201d<\/p>\n
Tong added: \u201cNo one should dismiss or denigrate the court\u2019s judgment or suggest that public opinion can somehow trump a court\u2019s decision.\u201d<\/p>\n
On Dec 4, speaking to reporters after his appeal was dismissed, Pritam was asked how he thought he would fare in the court of public opinion.<\/p>\n
Pritam said: \u201cI want to be careful with that. The court, in the matter of my magistrate\u2019s appeal, has delivered its verdict and I think we should respect it.\u201d<\/p>\n
He also said that he respected and accepted the judgment \u201cfully and without reservation\u201d.<\/p>\n
He told the media: \u201cFirst and foremost, the Supreme Court is a vital pillar of our constitutional framework.<\/p>\n
\u201cI have always had deep respect for the independence, rigour and professionalism of the courts.\u201d<\/p>\n
He was also asked about other comments he made on The Assembly about how his political opponents would \u201cdo whatever it takes\u201d to lower his and his party\u2019s esteem.<\/p>\n
He said that as an opposition MP, he will have political differences with his opponents.<\/p>\n
\u201cBut those differences do not extend to tearing the system down, and questioning or impugning the integrity of the courts or even civil servants, for example. That cannot be how we conduct opposition politics in Singapore.\u201d – The Straits Times\/ANN<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n