Parliament to Debate Conduct of Workers’ Party Leaders in January

Political analysts anticipate a significant parliamentary debate in January 2024 regarding the conduct of leaders from the Workers’ Party (WP). The discussions may pave the way for various punitive actions against party members, following the handling of a previous case involving former member Raeesah Khan and her false statements made in the House. Possible penalties could include fines, imprisonment, or suspension as Members of Parliament (MPs), should the motion criticizing the leadership pass.

Last week, Indranee Rajah, the Leader of the House, emphasized the necessity for parliament to deliberate on an “appropriate response” to the conviction of Pritam Singh, the WP chief, for lying under oath to a parliamentary committee. She later indicated that the conduct of party chair Sylvia Lim and vice-chair Faisal Manap would also be scrutinized during the next parliamentary session.

According to legal experts, it is highly likely that parliament will engage in a debate and vote on a formal motion concerning the WP leaders. As defined by the parliament’s official website, a motion serves as a proposal for the House to take action, express an opinion, or mandate certain activities.

The Parliament (Privileges, Immunities and Powers) Act grants parliament the authority to impose sanctions on MPs found guilty of contempt, abuse of parliamentary privileges, or other forms of dishonourable conduct. Penalties can include fines not exceeding S$50,000, suspension, or a jail term not lasting beyond the current parliamentary session.

Context of the Upcoming Debate

Speaking with Channel News Asia, Eugene Tan, an associate professor of law at Singapore Management University, noted that the upcoming debate is a “logical conclusion” following a previous parliamentary committee’s investigation into Raeesah Khan’s actions in 2021. The parliament had previously deferred sanctions against Mr. Singh and other WP leaders until criminal proceedings concerning Mr. Singh were concluded.

According to Assoc Prof Tan, parliament must address unresolved issues stemming from resolutions passed by the 14th Parliament on February 15, 2022, particularly concerning the roles of the WP leaders in relation to Ms. Khan’s false statements made during two parliamentary sittings in 2021.

With the findings of the Committee of Privileges having been affirmed by two court judgments, Assoc Prof Tan believes it is reasonable to expect that parliament will exercise its punitive powers against the trio of leaders involved. He pointed out the unprecedented nature of the alleged conspiracy to mislead parliament.

Another legal expert, Ben Chester Cheong, a law lecturer at the Singapore University of Social Sciences, suggested that a substantive motion would be the most appropriate avenue for debate, given how the issue has been presented publicly. He indicated that such a motion would allow the House to collectively consider the matter and, if necessary, to express a formal opinion.

Separation of Powers and Parliamentary Integrity

Analysts have stressed the importance of distinguishing between judicial and legislative actions. The parliament’s measures against WP leaders will not interfere with criminal liability determinations. Mr. Cheong explained that while a ministerial statement could outline the government’s position, the framing of the issue suggests that a debated motion is more fitting for addressing parliamentary integrity.

“The motion is likely to focus on privilege, accountability, and maintaining public trust in parliament,” Mr. Cheong added. Assoc Prof Tan also noted that any police or court actions do not limit parliament’s ability to address issues involving MPs or members of the public. This reflects the established convention of separation of powers, which is recognized in the Parliament (Privileges, Immunities and Powers) Act.

It is important to clarify that parliament does not have the authority to remove an MP from their position. The WP itself must initiate such actions. Assoc Prof Tan remarked that the WP could demand the resignation or expulsion of the involved leaders, which would result in them losing their MP seats.

In addition, the Parliament (Privileges, Immunities and Powers) Act outlines the punitive measures available to the House in cases of dishonourable conduct, abuse of privilege, or contempt. This can include reprimands, fines, or suspensions for defined periods.

The implications of the proceedings extend to Mr. Singh’s role as Leader of the Opposition, a position determined by Prime Minister Lawrence Wong. Mr. Wong affirmed on May 5, 2023, that Mr. Singh would continue in this capacity, which he has held since the 2020 general election. As Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Singh benefits from additional resources, such as an increased allowance for hiring legislative assistants and receiving briefings on national security matters.

As for Mr. Faisal, who is not currently an MP, the parliament retains the ability to take action against him. Notably, the Parliament (Privileges, Immunities and Powers) Act allows for sanctions against non-MPs, which could include prison terms or fines.

Observers have remarked that the 15th Parliament faces a challenging task in balancing procedural integrity while avoiding the perception of politically motivated actions. Maintaining the dignity and decorum of parliament is essential, especially in light of serious breaches of conduct. Assoc Prof Tan emphasized that parliament has a duty to follow up on resolutions passed in 2022, and failing to do so would be a dereliction of responsibility.