The Law Society of Singapore has scheduled a disciplinary hearing for August 13 against Workers’ Party chief Pritam Singh, a non-practising lawyer. The case, which will be heard by the Court of Three Judges, follows Singh’s February 2025 conviction on two counts of lying under oath to the Committee of Privileges regarding the 2021 Raeesah Khan parliamentary incident.
Court Proceedings and Legal Representation
The disciplinary proceedings will be presided over by a panel comprising Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, Justice Kannan Ramesh, and Justice See Kee Oon. According to the Singapore Courts website, this panel holds the authority to suspend legal practitioners or strike them off the rolls entirely.
The Law Society is represented by a team from Drew & Napier, led by Senior Counsel Cavinder Bull. Singh is represented by Peter Cuthbert Low and his team from Peter Low Chambers.
Context of the Disciplinary Action
The Law Society initiated these proceedings on March 4, following information from the Attorney-General’s Chambers regarding Singh’s conviction for offences involving “fraud or dishonesty.” A Law Society spokesperson confirmed on March 13 that the body is required by the Legal Profession Act to initiate such action against a regulated practitioner following such a conviction.
This legal challenge arrives after a series of political developments for the Aljunied GRC Member of Parliament. Following his conviction and the subsequent loss of his High Court appeal in December 2025, where he paid a $14,000 fine, Parliament deemed Singh unfit to continue as Leader of the Opposition. Prime Minister Lawrence Wong formally removed him from that position on January 15.
Under the Legal Profession Act, the Law Society is mandated to apply for disciplinary action against a regulated legal practitioner convicted of fraud or dishonesty without requiring further external direction.
Possible Sanctions and Internal Party Status
If the Court of Three Judges finds the disciplinary case established, potential sanctions include being struck off the rolls, receiving a censure, or facing a financial penalty of up to $100,000. While the court weighs these legal consequences, the Workers’ Party has conducted its own internal review.
On April 30, the Workers’ Party central executive committee issued a formal letter of reprimand to Singh for contravening two articles of the party’s Constitution. Despite this, Singh was re-elected as the party’s secretary-general on June 28, securing a “super-majority” of votes during internal elections amidst opposition from a group of cadres.
The upcoming hearing represents a significant legal hurdle for Singh, as it moves beyond the political sphere into the regulatory domain of his profession. The Court of Three Judges holds the authority to suspend errant lawyers or strike them off the rolls, and their decision could determine whether Singh maintains his standing as a legal professional, regardless of his ongoing role in the Workers’ Party.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why is the Law Society taking disciplinary action against Pritam Singh?
The Law Society is required by the Legal Profession Act to initiate proceedings because Singh, a non-practising lawyer, was convicted of offences involving “fraud or dishonesty.”
What are the potential outcomes of the August 13 hearing?
The Court of Three Judges has the power to impose sanctions including a censure, a financial penalty of up to $100,000, or striking the individual off the rolls of legal practitioners.
How has the Workers’ Party responded to Singh’s conviction?
The party established a disciplinary panel to review the conviction and issued a formal letter of reprimand to Singh on April 30. He was subsequently re-elected as secretary-general on June 28.
How might the court’s decision influence the future of Singh’s political career within the Workers’ Party?
