Pritam Singh trial: Raeesah Khan's ex-assistant testifies about 'bugged' phone fears, party fallout and anger

SINGAPORE: Former Workers' Party (WP) cadre and former secretarial assistant to Ms Raeesah Khan, Ms Loh Pei Ying, took the stand on Thursday (Oct 17) to testify against WP chief Pritam Singh.

Singh, 48, is on trial for lying before a Committee of Privileges (COP) about his intentions in interactions with Ms Khan, who had herself lied in parliament about accompanying a rape victim to a police station.

Ms Loh, who resigned from her 11-year involvement with WP in 2022, shared how she felt it was "convenient" for WP leaders to be putting the responsibility all on Ms Khan, how Singh himself should have stepped up and clarified the truth in parliament and that he had "every opportunity" to do so.

She felt the disciplinary panel set up to look into Ms Khan's lie was "performatory" to quell public and party anger, and reminded Singh about how he had made a similar mistake in parliament where he plagiarised a speech but had not faced similar consequences.

The disciplinary panel was made up of Singh, Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap - the same people who knew Ms Khan's anecdote was false a week after she delivered it on Aug 3, 2021, said Ms Loh.

She was against Ms Khan's resignation from the party, feeling that it would give the party and disciplinary panel "an opportunity to say she has shirked her responsibility from facing the consequences" and also of looking after her residents.

Ms Loh, who is the head and co-founder of the editorial studio Kontinentalist, was the second witness for the prosecution. She took the stand after Ms Khan underwent re-examination for about half an hour on Thursday morning.

In response to questions from Deputy Public Prosecutor Tan Ben Mathias, Ms Loh shared how she began as a General Election volunteer with WP in 2011 and later became a member and cadre member, with certain voting rights.

She was briefly Singh's secretarial assistant and later took on that role with Ms Khan, who was elected as a member of parliament for Sengkang Group Representation Constituency in 2020 after about half a year of starting with WP.

Ms Loh was a core member of the WP media team that ran the election campaign in 2020 and briefly part of WP's policy team.

WHEN SHE FIRST FOUND OUT ABOUT THE LIE

Ms Loh testified that she first found out the rape anecdote was a lie on Aug 7, 2021, after Ms Khan had first confessed to Singh.

Ms Loh arranged a Zoom video call with Ms Khan and another cadre member, Mr Yudhishthra Nathan, that night.

She said Ms Khan was "quite emotional and upset", worrying about what would happen to her and considering her resignation from the party. 

"We were mainly there to listen, console and offer her perspectives on the matter," said Ms Loh. "When we first talked on the call, she, as I said, was very emotional. She sort of told us that it was untrue and she put her face into her hands and cried, and relayed to us that the untruth was because she is herself a victim of sexual assault."

Ms Loh said Ms Khan was not very coherent and she and Mr Nathan asked questions to make sure they understood what happened.

"Then we discussed many matters, as I said, mostly about political history, WP history, because she had generally quite a poor understanding of it," she said.

Ms Loh said she was relieved when she learnt that Singh already knew it was a lie, as "it's a big deal or a stain, I would say, on WP's history or track record, for an MP to have lied about something like this".

"Emotionally, and morally, I felt also, quite, in a difficult place," she said, grimacing. "It was uncomfortable to be aware of this and feel like I had to hold this secret, and knowing that Mr Singh already knew sort of made me feel a little relieved because then if something were to be done about it, he would know what to do."

Ms Loh said Singh then arranged a meeting with her and Mr Nathan at the Aljunied-Hougang Town Council office in Eunos on Aug 10, 2021.

She said she arrived first and spoke to Singh about the importance of affirming Ms Khan's sexual assault experience despite her own "doubts and scepticism", avoiding saying certain things out loud. 

Asked by the prosecutor Mr Tan why she did this, Ms Loh said: "This sounds a bit silly but there is quite, at that point of time, a prevalent belief ... between myself, Mr Nathan and Ms Khan that our phones might be bugged, or listened to in some shape or form, because I think she had received a text from Apple a while ago that state forces were sort of trying to get into her phone.

"Mr Singh also was generally, I guess, worried about that, so actually, when I met him, I had to hand over my phone and keep it in the drawer behind him."

Ms Loh said she had a "fuzzy" memory but recalled that Singh affirmed that the untruth "probably wouldn't come up again".

She said Singh did not tell her or Mr Nathan that Ms Khan had to clarify the lie at the meeting on Aug 10. 

He also did not say he had asked Ms Khan to speak to her parents about the sexual assault, or ask the two cadre members to follow up and check with Ms Khan if she had spoken to her parents.

Ms Loh said she continued her duties as Ms Khan's secretarial assistant in the meantime, until Oct 4, 2021, when parliament sat.

She saw a Yahoo news article reporting on the exchange between Law Minister K Shanmugam and Ms Khan, in which the minister pressed for more details about the rape anecdote.

"I was very alarmed to read the exchange and felt a lot of worry and fear and wanted to understand what was going on," said Ms Loh.

She forwarded the article to a group chat she had with Ms Khan and Mr Nathan, and later deleted some messages. 

Explaining why she did this: "Ms Khan was paranoid that our devices were bugged as mentioned and she did not want us to say explicitly on text that she had lied, and she had requested me to delete the messages referencing that specifically."

After the series of deleted messages, Ms Loh sent a message telling Ms Khan to "lawyer up".

"I felt helpless to advise Ms Khan on the matter ... and really decided that the best course of action was for her to seek legal advice on what she's obliged to do, and I guess what her rights were for parliament," she said.

SHANMUGAM WILL NOT LET UP: LOH

Asked why a lawyer's advice was needed, Ms Loh said Mr Shanmugam had "made it very pointed and clear" in parliament that "he will not be letting up on the matter and that the police will follow up with her separately".

Ms Loh said she first became aware of the plan to clarify the lie in parliament on the afternoon of Oct 12, 2021.

At a meeting at Singh's house with Mr Nathan that day, they discussed the considerations of Ms Khan retaining the lie or coming clean, said Ms Loh.

She said she was concerned that people would criticise the party "as one that has no integrity, full of liars" and that it would affect party support and votes at the next election.

They also discussed if there would be a by-election following Ms Khan's resignation and the consequences of punishments she would receive in terms of facing a COP.

"We also talked obviously about how the party would be perceived to have this sort of on our record. We discussed also the possibility of, or rather the impossibility of, retaining the lie, because there was a surety that Minister Shanmugam would pursue the matter until it was addressed, so it could not be kept secret anymore," said Ms Loh.

She added that Mr Shanmugam was "determined to pursue it until he was satisfied".

At this meeting, Singh said he had consulted with party stalwart Low Thia Khiang on the matter, who thought the best course of action was to make a clarification in parliament, said Ms Loh.

She added that Mr Low said the WP would "survive the sort-of falling out that would follow". 

Hearing this assuaged Ms Loh and Mr Nathan, as they had "a lot of faith and confidence" in Mr Low's opinion.

Mr Singh also recounted that he "had a feeling this matter would come up in parliament" on Oct 4, 2021, and that he had spoken to Ms Khan the day before "and sort of gave her a choice whether or not to come clean in parliament and that he would not judge her", said Ms Loh.

She took this to mean that Ms Khan would not be punished, or judged in general, and that Singh would not have a poor opinion of Ms Khan regardless of what she did.

At the meeting, Ms Loh said Singh explained why the lie had to be clarified. The main reason was that Mr Shanmugam "wasn't going to let it go", and there was "a strong second reason", which was for Ms Khan's own conscience and for the party.

Ms Loh said she told Singh that Ms Khan must first inform her parents about the sexual assault, and Singh's reaction "was like, 'oh yeah, you're right'".

He did not say that he had already asked Ms Khan to tell her parents, Ms Loh added.

She said she did not receive any instructions from Singh, Ms Lim or Mr Faisal Manap about clarifying the lie between Oct 5 and Oct 11, 2021.

THE APOLOGY, AND THE AFTERMATH

Ms Loh also testified about her unhappiness at some of the WP's actions after Ms Khan told parliament on Nov 1, 2021, that her anecdote was untrue.

The next day, WP issued a statement to say that a disciplinary panel had been formed to look into Ms Khan's conduct.

On Nov 10, 2021, a message was sent to WP members asking for views on the whole matter.

"I was extremely angry," said Ms Loh. "I really felt that members had no business giving comments on the matter when they did not know the true timeline of events which was that Mr Singh, Ms Lim and Mr Manap knew she had lied a week after she first lied."

She sent a message to Singh that same day about the message, saying: "I feel that it's as plain as day to me and the people involved in her apology that this is a little backwards pedalling."

She added: "I was of the opinion that the disciplinary panel was performatory. Meaning that it was an action Singh had taken to quell party and public anger on the matter, but it did not have real consequences, so to speak. They weren't going to take drastic action on her."

She clarified that she used the term "performatory" to mean "put on a show".

She said she later told Singh that he should have stepped up and clarified the truth in parliament in October 2021 if he was of the view that that should have been done.

"It's not just, he's the leader of the opposition, it's not just Ms Khan's responsibility, given he had knowledge that a lie had been done, he also had every opportunity to step up and clarify," she said. 

"I told him that. He was quite upset at me for saying that and sort of pointed at me with a pen and said 'I went to her the night before I told her-' but I cut him off ... I only had half an hour and I had many points to go through."

Singh did not look up at Ms Loh as she said this, instead continuing to take notes.

"I also referenced the fact that he had made a similar mistake in parliament where he plagiarised a speech on the ombudsman and he didn't face the same punishment. He took my point," said Ms Loh.

She also mentioned support for Ms Khan from residents and volunteers, saying she "wanted to share my view of her that she is kind and compassionate despite her inexperience" and was willing to face the consequences and rectify her mistake through hard work.

Ms Loh also said she was the one who had felt it was important for Ms Khan to include details of her sexual assault in her statement, and that she also felt Sengkang residents should have been given a chance to vote for their MPs again.

The prosecution completed its questioning of Ms Loh at lunchtime. The hearing will resume in the afternoon with the defence cross-examining Ms Loh.