Pritam Singh struck off rolls over conviction for lying to parliamentary committee
Selina Lum and Vanessa Paige Chelvan
The Straits Times
Aug 13, 2026
Workers’ Party (WP) chief Pritam Singh, a non-practising lawyer, was struck off the rolls on Aug 13 over his criminal conviction for lying to a parliamentary committee.
Both the Law Society of Singapore and Singh agreed that the high threshold to avoid a striking-off in his case was not met.
The striking-off was handed down by the Court of Three Judges, the highest disciplinary body for the legal profession, which has the power to suspend errant lawyers or strike them off the rolls.
The panel comprised Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, Justice Kannan Ramesh and Justice See Kee Oon.
Singh, who is an MP for Aljunied GRC, was convicted by a district judge in February 2025 on two counts of lying under oath to the Committee of Privileges.
This was related to former WP MP Raeesah Khan’s lie in Parliament in 2021 about details of a sexual assault case that she alleged was mishandled by the police in Singapore.
In December 2025, Singh lost his appeal to the High Court against his conviction and paid his $14,000 fine.
On March 4, 2026, the society started disciplinary proceedings against Singh in compliance with the Legal Profession Act.
This was based on information received from the Attorney-General’s Chambers that Singh had been convicted of offences involving “fraud or dishonesty”, a Law Society spokesperson had earlier told The Straits Times.
Under the Act, when a regulated legal practitioner has been convicted of an offence involving fraud and dishonesty, the Law Society is required to apply to the court for disciplinary action to be taken.
On Aug 13, the society, represented by Senior Counsel Cavinder Bull, said that based on precedent, Singh should be struck off.
Bull noted that the law is clear that misconduct involving dishonesty will almost inevitably lead to an order for striking off, unless there are truly exceptional circumstances.
In present case there are no exceptional circumstances that mitigate against the striking off, he said, adding that Singh should be treated the same as other lawyers.
Bull said Singh’s public service as an MP did not amount to exceptional circumstances.
He said Singh’s prominence in the public sphere aggravates, rather than detract from, the negative impact of his conduct.
Singh’s lawyer, Senior Counsel Chelva Rajah, accepted that the legal threshold to avoid a striking off is not met.
He conceded that dishonesty was an essential element of the offence that Singh had been convicted of.
This is a developing story.
Explore more on these topics
See something interesting? Contribute your story to us.
