Could Singapore remove Pritam Singh as Leader of the Opposition?

In an unprecedented move in Singapore, Workers’ Party (WP) chief Pritam Singh could be stripped of his title as Leader of Opposition and lose his privileges when Singapore’s parliamentarians debate his suitability for the role next week, legal experts say. Singh was the first to be appointed to the official role in 2020 by then prime minister Lee Hsien Loong after the general election that year, when the WP won a record 10 out of 93 seats. On Friday, Leader of the House Indranee Rajah tabled a motion for next Tuesday or later in the week, calling on parliament to consider that Singh’s “conviction and conduct render him unsuitable to continue as the Leader of the Opposition” and to express regret at his conduct, which was “dishonourable and unbecoming” of an MP. This comes after Singh, MP for Aljunied constituency, was convicted on two charges and fined S$14,000 (US$10,879) in February last year for lying under oath to a parliamentary committee looking into a lie former WP MP Raeesah Khan told in parliament in 2021. His conviction was upheld on December 4 after he appealed against it. “The Leader of the Opposition is not a legal or constitutional office. It was created by parliament and can technically be removed by parliament as well. If parliament passes a resolution to strip Singh of the title, it will be done,” Kevin Tan, a constitutional law expert and adjunct professor at the National University of Singapore, told This Week in Asia. Benjamin Joshua Ong, assistant professor of law at Singapore Management University, said there was no established precedent on whether the title of Leader of the Opposition could be revoked. “But my instinctive view is that given the weight that the title now carries, any revocation should be done only through a motion which parliament votes to pass.” The outcome next week will be precedent-setting Eugene Tan, law professor and political observer Law professor and political observer Eugene Tan similarly noted that the appointment was not governed by the constitution, any law or parliamentary standing orders, and much would depend on Singh’s next move should parliament conclude he was unsuitable to continue in the role. Should Singh not resign of his own accord, then Prime Minister Lawrence Wong’s hand could be forced, and Wong can be expected to revoke Singh as Leader of the Opposition. “The outcome next week will be precedent-setting,” Eugene Tan said. Singapore’s parliament is currently dominated by the People’s Action Party, which occupies 87 of the 97 elected seats, the remaining spots belonging to WP MPs. As Leader of the Opposition, Singh’s privileges include an annual allowance of S$385,000, double that of an elected MP, and a separate allowance to hire up to three additional legislative assistants. He is also provided with an office and a secretary. In parliament, he is generally given the right of first response among MPs and gets more time for his speeches. According to a ministerial statement on the duties and privileges of the Leader of the Opposition in 2020, Singh also receives confidential government briefings on select matters of national security and external relations, and will be briefed in the event of a national crisis or emergency. Jaclyn Neo, associate professor of law at the National University of Singapore, noted that while there were no specific written rules, it could be argued that there was a “constitutional convention” or informal rules outlining political costs instead of legal ones in the event of a breach. “The position was formalised in parliament through ministerial speeches in 2020, and by now, one could argue that there is a constitutional convention for it,” Neo said. She noted that the Leader of the Opposition role was distinct from Singh’s MP position, and he could not lose his seat unless it was vacated by the provisions set out in the constitution, which include him resigning, no longer being a citizen or a member of his political party. Ong pointed out that, while rare, there was a procedure for parliament to expel an MP under the constitution. Parliament must first state that the MP has committed “any dishonourable conduct, abuse of privilege or contempt”, then it must resolve to refer the matter to a select committee before parliament considers the report of the committee and decides whether the MP is indeed guilty. If found guilty, the individual might be fined, suspended or expelled by parliament, Ong said. A WP spokesman said on Friday the party would address the matter during the parliamentary sitting, when the motion would be debated, and it did not have further comments to make at the time. On January 3, WP said its central executive committee directed a disciplinary panel to be formed to determine if Singh had contravened the party’s constitution. There was also a request by cadres for a special conference to be held to discuss the issue, set to be called after the disciplinary panel has completed its work. The party said that the disciplinary process would be concluded within three months, and notice of the special conference would be issued within two weeks after the conclusion of the disciplinary process. Political scientist Bilveer Singh suggested that the party’s disciplinary hearing would unlikely result in Singh’s expulsion from WP, saying: “It’s very unlikely that the party will decide to kill itself.” He also pointed out that how the PAP decided to vote during the debate would set a precedent, not only for the opposition but for its members too. “Whatever PAP does, it sets the precedent for itself too. Whatever they do to him will also apply to themselves in the future if one of their members faces a similar situation,” Singh said. Under Singapore’s constitution, an MP faces disqualification from parliament if convicted of an offence carrying a jail term of at least one year or a fine of S$10,000 or more. Each count of lying under oath before a parliamentary committee carries a maximum penalty of a S$7,000 fine and three years’ imprisonment. Singh received a S$7,000 fine for each of his two charges, and he was able to contest in the general election on May 3 last year, when he retained his parliamentary seat.

Could Singapore remove Pritam Singh as Leader of the Opposition?

.css-1c6uqr6{color:inherit;font-weight:inherit;font-size:inherit;font-family:inherit;line-height:inherit;overflow-wrap:break-word;}Parliament will soon debate a motion to consider whether Singh’s ‘conviction and conduct render him unsuitable to continue’ in the role

Parliament will soon debate a motion to consider whether Singh’s ‘conviction and conduct render him unsuitable to continue’ in the role