Judge blocks release of unredacted messages from ex-Workers Party: Highlights from day 8 of Pritam Singh trial

SINGAPORE – A request by Workers’ Party (WP) chief Pritam Singh’s lawyer to obtain a full set of message logs from prosecution witness Yudhishthra Nathan (pictured) was dismissed by the judge when the trial resumed on Wednesday (October 23).

Deputy Chief District Judge Luke Tan said he saw no legal basis for Nathan’s unredacted messages to the Committee on Privileges (COP) to be disclosed to the defence.

That’s because the messages don’t meet disclosure requirements under case law.

Singh’s lawyer, Andre Jumabhoy, had earlier this week requested the unredacted and redacted versions of Nathan’s message logs at the COP, arguing that they went directly to whether the testimonies of Nathan and his WP colleague Loh Pei Ying, who both assisted Khan in his trial. duties as an MP are credible.

The judge said that after carefully examining the documents, he was satisfied that none of the messages were relevant to Singh’s guilt or innocence. Because the redactions were made for the purpose of the COP’s specific investigation, the scope and basis of the redactions were also not relevant to the current criminal trial.

Judge Tan also noted that a list of Nathan’s unredacted messages, as well as Loh Pei Ying’s complete list of redacted and unredacted messages, have already been admitted as evidence for the trial.

While there is “no doubt” that Nathan’s credibility – as with the credibility of all witnesses – is an issue, the messages that are already part of the trial evidence can and have been used to assess this , he added.

Singh is contesting two charges over his alleged lies to the COP, which was convened in November 2021 to investigate former Sengkang WP MP Raeesah Khan’s lie in Parliament.

On 3 August 2021, Khan had told Parliament how he had accompanied a sexual assault victim to a police station, where the victim was treated insensitively. He repeated the claim before the House on 4 October of the same year, before admitting his lie on 1 November 2021.

Former WP secretary-general Low Thia Khiang took the stand in the afternoon, after the defense finished its cross-examination of Nathan. Here are the key points from Nathan’s evidence on 23 October:

1. WP cadres did not tell COP about “important” discussion with Singh

Nathan questioned why neither he nor Loh had told the COP what they later told the police, which was that Singh had told them at a meeting on 12 October 2021 that the WP was changing its strategy on the lie of khan.

Nathan had earlier testified that the WP chief had told him at that meeting that the party now wanted Khan to come clean, as perhaps the government already knew that Khan’s anecdote was not true, and that it would be “bad karma ” keep the lie .

Jumabhoy asked why Nathan did not mention this at the COP, given that the old WP cadre had agreed that this change in strategy was significant.

The defense lawyer pointed out that the Minister of Culture, Community and Youth, Edwin Tong, had specifically asked the COP if anything more relevant had happened at that meeting on October 12, and had not mentioned it to the commission .

Nathan replied that it was a very long meeting, and that it was not something that crossed his mind when he was in front of the COP.

Jumbahoy then told Nathan that he didn’t mention it at the COP because this exchange with Singh didn’t happen and he made it up. Nathan disagreed.

2. Nathan and Loh discussed the events between the COP hearings and the police investigation

Under cross-examination, Nathan said he had met Loh sometime between the COP hearings in late 2021 and the police investigations in early 2022 to discuss the matter, although he could not recall whether they discussed what happened on October 12, 2021. meeting.

When asked if he and Loh had tried to “remove each other’s memory”, Nathan said they had conversations about what happened but disagreed with the defence’s characterization.

When asked if it was possible for them to describe to each other what should be included in their statements to the police, Nathan, however, said: “No. I wouldn’t put it that way.”

He later accepted that some of those conversations were what they were telling the police, but disagreed when Jumabhoy said he or Loh had brought up “this little nugget about Pritam Singh admitting there was a change in the party’s strategy”.

Nathan said he could not recall whether he had learned whether the police were investigating the matter when he spoke to Loh.

That’s because he couldn’t remember whether they had spoken before or after Parliament debated the COP report on February 15, 2022. In that session, the House had voted to refer Singh to the prosecutor for further investigation.

3. “Pritam Singh would try to use this information against him”

The court heard that Nathan met Loh for dinner on two occasions – once on November 29, 2021 and again on December 1, 2021, which Khan joined. Mike Lim, then Khan’s legislative assistant, was also at both meetings.

Asked if they discussed the upcoming COP hearings on those occasions, Nathan said: “Possibly.”

Nathan said that Khan at the time was a little afraid to face the COP and tell the truth that WP leaders had told him to keep his lie since August 2021.

Nathan explained that while they were together on December 1, Lim had gone out to make a phone call with Singh.

Before Lim made the call, Loh had told her to tell Singh that she had been called before the COP and that she was not going to lie to save the party, Nathan explained.

Mr Nathan said he remembered it well as Ms Loh had become emotional and was “trying to give (Singh) another chance to tell the public what really happened”.

Singh had countered that Loh should go to the COP and tell the truth, a reaction Nathan said surprised him.

Jumabhoy referred to a message on December 22, 2021 in his group chat, where Loh had asked Lim to be careful when talking to the WP chief. The message also read: “Please don’t tell him we met before the COP, ok? He really can’t tell.”

At this time, Nathan had added to the chat, “Just to protect you.”

Asked what his words meant, Nathan said: “In case (Singh) tried to use this information against him.”

Jumabhoy then told Nathan that he and Loh had been aligning the facts of the COP to ensure that both stories matched and that they had checked with each other what messages to include and what to write in their submissions to the committee Nathan and Loh had also continued to lie to the police together, the lawyer claimed.

Nathan disagreed with all of these statements. – The Straits Times/ ANN