-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Chitchat Why Jamus Lim join Workers' Party ?
- Thread starter batman1
- Start date
from yahoo.com:
SINGAPORE — The Committee of Privileges (COP) tasked with investigating a complaint about former Sengkang Member of Parliament Raeesah Khan’s lies in Parliament on Wednesday (15 December) issued summons to three top Workers’ Party (WP) leaders over their failure to produce internal documents as requested by the COP.
In its fifth special report released on Wednesday, the COP said it had previously asked WP’s chief Pritam Singh, chair Sylvia Lim and vice chair Faisal Manap to produce documents, including internal correspondence between senior leadership concerning issues raised by the COP.
The requests were raised on various occasions from last Friday to Tuesday.
“However, Mr Pritam Singh, Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap have failed and/or refused to provide them. As such, a summons was each issued to Mr Pritam Singh, Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap on 15 December 2021,” the COP said in its report.
The COP will consider the responses from Singh, Lim and Faisal on the summons next Monday.
The proceedings of the COP have largely concluded apart from a few outstanding matters, according to the COP, which will present its findings and recommendations to Parliament in due course.
On 3 August, Raeesah alleged in Parliament that she had accompanied a victim of sexual assault to a police station three years ago. The victim was supposedly subject to remarks by a police officer at the station about her dressing and questions on whether she had been drinking.
On 4 October, the former MP stood by her anecdote in Parliament under questioning by Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam.
Raeesah admitted in Parliament on 1 November that she had lied about the incident and issued a tearful apology. The revelation prompted the Leader of the House Indranee Rajah to file a complaint for a COP to be convened to investigate Raeesah’s lies in Parliament.
On 30 November, the WP said Raeesah had resigned from the party and as MP of Sengkang.
“PS: Before Oct session, I met you + I told you it was your call. Did need to tell the truth in Parliament occur to you?
RK: Yes but consumed with guilt + own experience. Thought it wouldn’t come up.
PS: Can’t lie right?
RK: Yes.”
In the COP's questioning led by Minister for Culture, Community and Youth Edwin Tong, Singh was told that there were two issues arising from Lim’s notes – what Singh had told Raeesah on 3 October, and second, what Raeesah should do, and what Singh expected her to do, if the matter arose.
Singh said Lim’s notes accurately reflected what he had said to Raeesah during the DP hearing on 29 November. He agreed that the phrase “your call” might be interpreted as him telling Raeesah on 3 October that she had to make a choice as to whether to tell the truth or continue to lie, if she was asked in Parliament on 4 October.
“However, Mr Singh said that what he had meant when he said ‘your call’ was not this ordinary meaning, but that Ms Khan should take responsibility for her work in Parliament,” according to the report.
What he had said had to be looked at in context, Singh added. While he had used the language “It is your call to make” on 29 November to describe what he had told Raeesah on 3 October, “those were not the words he had in fact used to Ms Khan on 3 Oct, and the words he used did not offer Ms Khan a choice”, the report said.
Singh said, “I think it was in the context of how she was responding to us. That whole meeting on the 29th was a meeting where she was just continually crying and crying and crying, and in that context, I put a question that I felt would elicit a response that could be helpful to the DP.”
Singh was also asked why he had not told Raeesah in “clear, simple, direct terms” on 3 October that she must own up and tell the truth in Parliament, given that she was a new MP and that she admitted in August that she had lied in Parliament.
In his reply, Singh said that he had communicated to Raeesah in his own way on 3 October for her to take ownership and responsibility.
Singh was also asked about the evidence by Loh Pei Ying, Raeesah’s aide, to the COP, regarding how he had recounted to Loh about his meeting on 3 October with Raeesah.
“Mr Singh agreed that Ms Loh’s takeaway from her conversation with Mr Singh, was that Mr Singh had, on 3 Oct, given Ms Khan a choice whether to tell the truth or continue the lie,” according to the report.
The generally mild exchange between Tong and Singh on Wednesday was a stark contrast to last Friday’s marathon nine-hour COP session, when at times they engaged in heated and tense arguments.
Raeesah Khan probe: COP issues summons to WP leaders for failure to produce internal documents
SINGAPORE — The Committee of Privileges (COP) tasked with investigating a complaint about former Sengkang Member of Parliament Raeesah Khan’s lies in Parliament on Wednesday (15 December) issued summons to three top Workers’ Party (WP) leaders over their failure to produce internal documents as requested by the COP.
In its fifth special report released on Wednesday, the COP said it had previously asked WP’s chief Pritam Singh, chair Sylvia Lim and vice chair Faisal Manap to produce documents, including internal correspondence between senior leadership concerning issues raised by the COP.
The requests were raised on various occasions from last Friday to Tuesday.
“However, Mr Pritam Singh, Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap have failed and/or refused to provide them. As such, a summons was each issued to Mr Pritam Singh, Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap on 15 December 2021,” the COP said in its report.
The COP will consider the responses from Singh, Lim and Faisal on the summons next Monday.
The proceedings of the COP have largely concluded apart from a few outstanding matters, according to the COP, which will present its findings and recommendations to Parliament in due course.
On 3 August, Raeesah alleged in Parliament that she had accompanied a victim of sexual assault to a police station three years ago. The victim was supposedly subject to remarks by a police officer at the station about her dressing and questions on whether she had been drinking.
On 4 October, the former MP stood by her anecdote in Parliament under questioning by Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam.
Raeesah admitted in Parliament on 1 November that she had lied about the incident and issued a tearful apology. The revelation prompted the Leader of the House Indranee Rajah to file a complaint for a COP to be convened to investigate Raeesah’s lies in Parliament.
On 30 November, the WP said Raeesah had resigned from the party and as MP of Sengkang.
Pritam recalled by COP
Meanwhile, Singh was recalled by the COP on Wednesday over a document produced by Lim and submitted to the COP. The document contained notes that Lim wrote during the WP’s Disciplinary Panel (DP) interview with Raeesah on 29 November arising from an exchange between Singh and Raeesah:“PS: Before Oct session, I met you + I told you it was your call. Did need to tell the truth in Parliament occur to you?
RK: Yes but consumed with guilt + own experience. Thought it wouldn’t come up.
PS: Can’t lie right?
RK: Yes.”
In the COP's questioning led by Minister for Culture, Community and Youth Edwin Tong, Singh was told that there were two issues arising from Lim’s notes – what Singh had told Raeesah on 3 October, and second, what Raeesah should do, and what Singh expected her to do, if the matter arose.
Singh said Lim’s notes accurately reflected what he had said to Raeesah during the DP hearing on 29 November. He agreed that the phrase “your call” might be interpreted as him telling Raeesah on 3 October that she had to make a choice as to whether to tell the truth or continue to lie, if she was asked in Parliament on 4 October.
“However, Mr Singh said that what he had meant when he said ‘your call’ was not this ordinary meaning, but that Ms Khan should take responsibility for her work in Parliament,” according to the report.
What he had said had to be looked at in context, Singh added. While he had used the language “It is your call to make” on 29 November to describe what he had told Raeesah on 3 October, “those were not the words he had in fact used to Ms Khan on 3 Oct, and the words he used did not offer Ms Khan a choice”, the report said.
Singh said, “I think it was in the context of how she was responding to us. That whole meeting on the 29th was a meeting where she was just continually crying and crying and crying, and in that context, I put a question that I felt would elicit a response that could be helpful to the DP.”
Singh was also asked why he had not told Raeesah in “clear, simple, direct terms” on 3 October that she must own up and tell the truth in Parliament, given that she was a new MP and that she admitted in August that she had lied in Parliament.
In his reply, Singh said that he had communicated to Raeesah in his own way on 3 October for her to take ownership and responsibility.
Singh was also asked about the evidence by Loh Pei Ying, Raeesah’s aide, to the COP, regarding how he had recounted to Loh about his meeting on 3 October with Raeesah.
“Mr Singh agreed that Ms Loh’s takeaway from her conversation with Mr Singh, was that Mr Singh had, on 3 Oct, given Ms Khan a choice whether to tell the truth or continue the lie,” according to the report.
The generally mild exchange between Tong and Singh on Wednesday was a stark contrast to last Friday’s marathon nine-hour COP session, when at times they engaged in heated and tense arguments.
The Committee of Pigs is so wise. They are millionaire ministars and can use their their working hours to make life a hell for the WP MPs who have day jobs, besides serving as MPs. Well done, PAP. That is how you make life difficult for the Opposition. Those who wishes to join the Opposition, you have been warned.
This was not the original intention for both parties, but Pritam is making Edwin look like an arrogant fool.
Jamus Lim gives oral evidence at Committee of Privileges hearing on Dec 13
Workers' Party (WP) Member of Parliament, Associate Professor Jamus Jerome Lim gave oral evidence to the Committee of Privileges (COP) on Monday (Dec 13), as it looks into a complaint that former WP member of Parliament Raeesah Khan breached parliamentary privilege. This video recording of A/P Lim's appearance before the COP was released on Tuesday.
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/wat...e-committee-privileges-hearing-dec-13-2380441
Workers' Party (WP) Member of Parliament, Associate Professor Jamus Jerome Lim gave oral evidence to the Committee of Privileges (COP) on Monday (Dec 13), as it looks into a complaint that former WP member of Parliament Raeesah Khan breached parliamentary privilege. This video recording of A/P Lim's appearance before the COP was released on Tuesday.
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/wat...e-committee-privileges-hearing-dec-13-2380441
Jamus helps to give out goodies. 
This weekend, our trusty #TeamSengkang volunteers organized our annual Christmas and back-to-school event, where we gave out book vouchers, cookies, child-sized masks, and other small gifts to school-aged children at our rental block in #Anchorvale. In the spirit of the occasion, I put on a hat and bearded mask to play the role of “Sengkang Claus” (hohoho), and helped give out presents to the kids. Heartfelt thanks to our hardworking volunteers and all generous donors, including Xenium, as well as others that have chosen to remain anonymous. #SengkangGRC
Jamus Lim
12 hrs ·This weekend, our trusty #TeamSengkang volunteers organized our annual Christmas and back-to-school event, where we gave out book vouchers, cookies, child-sized masks, and other small gifts to school-aged children at our rental block in #Anchorvale. In the spirit of the occasion, I put on a hat and bearded mask to play the role of “Sengkang Claus” (hohoho), and helped give out presents to the kids. Heartfelt thanks to our hardworking volunteers and all generous donors, including Xenium, as well as others that have chosen to remain anonymous. #SengkangGRC
Jamus congratulates Kean Yew.
https://www.facebook.com/jamusjlim?__tn__=<<*F
Success is often sweetest when it is unexpected, and certainly when it is unprecedented. Shuttler Loh Kean Yew entered the Badminton World Championship as an unseeded (albeit solidly-ranked) prospect, and, along the way, dispatched multiple higher-ranked opponents. And with his gutsy performance over a seemingly fleeting—but deeply consequential—42-minute final, he has now etched himself into the annals of our Little Red Dot’s most impressive sporting achievements. Congratulations, Kean Yew! May you not only continue to find success in the sport, but also continue to amaze and inspire generations of our sportsmen and women (and nonsportspeople too!) to believe in themselves, and achieve the unexpected.
https://www.facebook.com/jamusjlim?__tn__=<<*F
Jamus Lim
13 hrs ·Success is often sweetest when it is unexpected, and certainly when it is unprecedented. Shuttler Loh Kean Yew entered the Badminton World Championship as an unseeded (albeit solidly-ranked) prospect, and, along the way, dispatched multiple higher-ranked opponents. And with his gutsy performance over a seemingly fleeting—but deeply consequential—42-minute final, he has now etched himself into the annals of our Little Red Dot’s most impressive sporting achievements. Congratulations, Kean Yew! May you not only continue to find success in the sport, but also continue to amaze and inspire generations of our sportsmen and women (and nonsportspeople too!) to believe in themselves, and achieve the unexpected.
Jamus wishes those who celebrate, a happy winter solstice.
https://www.facebook.com/jamusjlim?__tn__=<<*F
Around the world, festivals are an important way to remember the past, and to commemorate with practices that bind us together as a community. By the same token, the passing on of tradition ensures that these memories persist in the generations to come. This Dongzhi, our daughter is now old enough for her to partake in this festival, so today, she had her first taste of tangyuan (which she couldn’t get enough of, and yes, I broke them into bite-size pieces). For those who celebrate, a happy winter solstice
https://www.facebook.com/jamusjlim?__tn__=<<*F
Jamus Lim
1 hr ·Around the world, festivals are an important way to remember the past, and to commemorate with practices that bind us together as a community. By the same token, the passing on of tradition ensures that these memories persist in the generations to come. This Dongzhi, our daughter is now old enough for her to partake in this festival, so today, she had her first taste of tangyuan (which she couldn’t get enough of, and yes, I broke them into bite-size pieces). For those who celebrate, a happy winter solstice
from msn.com:
Wisdom on hindsight seems to be what the Parliament Committee of Privileges into the Raeesah Khan saga is vigorously seeking. On hindsight, the government should not have asked couples to stop at two in the 1960s/70s. That policy was clearly criminal but were the criminals hauled to court and questioned?
Asking Workers’ Party secretary-general and Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh and two other senior WP leaders why they did not ride roughshod over the immediate welfare of a fellow MP and force her to come clean in Parliament on the spot sounded like asking them to condemn themselves for something they felt at the relevant time was the right thing to do.
Pritam Singh testified that his topmost concern was the welfare of a distraught fellow MP above everything else. That was when Khan revealed she was a victim of sexual assault, which apparently led her to concoct a lie in Parliament about accompanying a sexual assault victim to a police station, where she allegedly witnessed police officers making inappropriate remarks.
He said he, WP Chairman Sylvia Lim and Vice-Chairman Faisal Manap felt it was important that Khan let her family know before even thinking about taking any other steps. It was also important, according to Singh, that she took responsibility for her action. Without pushing the matter further, Singh left it to Khan to correct the matter (allegation) in Parliament.
Singh: “Of immediate concern to me was the fact that Khan had not previously informed her family members of her sexual assault, which had traumatised her greatly. In my judgment, it was important that she did so before she could fully address the reasons behind her untruthful conduct in Parliament, and to correct the record. In view of her sexual assault and my assessment of her state of mind, I was prepared to give her the space necessary to address the matter with her loved ones.”
That was the right call to make.
Khan finally admitted on Nov 1 in Parliament to her Aug 3 lie.
Then the public focus started, with the sittings of the Committee of Privileges, to switch from the perpetrator of the lie, the one who caused the whole mess, to Pritam Singh, the person who was landed with the mess and was dealing with it the best way he could, together with his two senior leaders who reiterated to the COP their complete confidence in him.
So what do we make of Raeesah Khan’s testimony at the COP hearing that Singh asked her to “take the lie to the grave”. All three WP leaders denied the allegation. Another Sengkang GRC MP Jamus Lim said the fact that the three leaders knew of Khan’s lie from Aug 8 would only be “material information” which had to be disclosed to the party’s top leadership body if they had, as she alleged, instructed her to take her lie to the grave. But Khan had been told subsequently to tell the truth after being given some time.
All this evidence about showing compunction for a fellow MP, albeit untruthful and unreliable (breaking a promise to reveal the truth but, as a frustrated Sylvia Lim said, instead doubling down on the lie), revealed, in fact, that the WP leaders had been a bit too kind perhaps.
Franky, I would give more credence to Singh’s explanation rather than even entertain anything that Raeesah Khan had to say.
He was right to be more concerned about her state of mind when she revealed in tears that she was a victim of sexual assault, that he felt she should talk to her family members before anything else. The other senior party leaders, Lim and Faisal, shared the same concern. Compunction for a fellow MP overrode other considerations.
Singaporeans cannot be faulted if they have been asking themselves: Who or what was being investigated by the COP? It is a fair and important question because the ex-MP has already admitted in Parliament that she lied and she has already resigned. She is no longer around to cause more damage to the local political polity and because her public credibility must be considered zero, one would have to be wary about giving much weight to anything she has to say.
With this column, I wish all TISG readers Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. Sense and Nonsense will take a break next week and will resume on Jan 2, 2022.
Who do you believe – Pritam Singh or Raeesah Khan? Answer is not difficult
Wisdom on hindsight seems to be what the Parliament Committee of Privileges into the Raeesah Khan saga is vigorously seeking. On hindsight, the government should not have asked couples to stop at two in the 1960s/70s. That policy was clearly criminal but were the criminals hauled to court and questioned?
Asking Workers’ Party secretary-general and Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh and two other senior WP leaders why they did not ride roughshod over the immediate welfare of a fellow MP and force her to come clean in Parliament on the spot sounded like asking them to condemn themselves for something they felt at the relevant time was the right thing to do.
Pritam Singh testified that his topmost concern was the welfare of a distraught fellow MP above everything else. That was when Khan revealed she was a victim of sexual assault, which apparently led her to concoct a lie in Parliament about accompanying a sexual assault victim to a police station, where she allegedly witnessed police officers making inappropriate remarks.
He said he, WP Chairman Sylvia Lim and Vice-Chairman Faisal Manap felt it was important that Khan let her family know before even thinking about taking any other steps. It was also important, according to Singh, that she took responsibility for her action. Without pushing the matter further, Singh left it to Khan to correct the matter (allegation) in Parliament.
Singh: “Of immediate concern to me was the fact that Khan had not previously informed her family members of her sexual assault, which had traumatised her greatly. In my judgment, it was important that she did so before she could fully address the reasons behind her untruthful conduct in Parliament, and to correct the record. In view of her sexual assault and my assessment of her state of mind, I was prepared to give her the space necessary to address the matter with her loved ones.”
That was the right call to make.
Khan finally admitted on Nov 1 in Parliament to her Aug 3 lie.
Then the public focus started, with the sittings of the Committee of Privileges, to switch from the perpetrator of the lie, the one who caused the whole mess, to Pritam Singh, the person who was landed with the mess and was dealing with it the best way he could, together with his two senior leaders who reiterated to the COP their complete confidence in him.
So what do we make of Raeesah Khan’s testimony at the COP hearing that Singh asked her to “take the lie to the grave”. All three WP leaders denied the allegation. Another Sengkang GRC MP Jamus Lim said the fact that the three leaders knew of Khan’s lie from Aug 8 would only be “material information” which had to be disclosed to the party’s top leadership body if they had, as she alleged, instructed her to take her lie to the grave. But Khan had been told subsequently to tell the truth after being given some time.
All this evidence about showing compunction for a fellow MP, albeit untruthful and unreliable (breaking a promise to reveal the truth but, as a frustrated Sylvia Lim said, instead doubling down on the lie), revealed, in fact, that the WP leaders had been a bit too kind perhaps.
Franky, I would give more credence to Singh’s explanation rather than even entertain anything that Raeesah Khan had to say.
He was right to be more concerned about her state of mind when she revealed in tears that she was a victim of sexual assault, that he felt she should talk to her family members before anything else. The other senior party leaders, Lim and Faisal, shared the same concern. Compunction for a fellow MP overrode other considerations.
Singaporeans cannot be faulted if they have been asking themselves: Who or what was being investigated by the COP? It is a fair and important question because the ex-MP has already admitted in Parliament that she lied and she has already resigned. She is no longer around to cause more damage to the local political polity and because her public credibility must be considered zero, one would have to be wary about giving much weight to anything she has to say.
With this column, I wish all TISG readers Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. Sense and Nonsense will take a break next week and will resume on Jan 2, 2022.
The question is whether Khan works for the PAP. We will never know until a few years later. Just keep track of her and family over that time. I have not met anyone more stupid than Khan; who in the right frame of mind would lie to Parliament and expect to get away with it.
There are certainly moles in the opposition. Sooner or later, they will reveal themselves.
from msn.com:
Singapore — Workers’ Party Member of Parliament Jamus Lim, together with party volunteers, brought joy to some children by playing “Sengkang Claus” and distributing back-to-school packs.
“This weekend, our trusty #TeamSengkang volunteers organized our annual Christmas and back-to-school event, where we gave out book vouchers, cookies, child-sized masks, and other small gifts to school-aged children at our rental block in #Anchorvale.
Assoc Prof Lim posted photos of the festive event, including one of some masked WP volunteers.
Commenters expressed appreciation for their efforts, including some who made reference to WP members having had to appear before the Committee of Privileges in wake of the Raeesah Khan scandal.
© The Independent Singapore
© The Independent Singapore
Others even left positive comments about Prof Lim’s trim physique, saying he was too fit to play a traditional Santa Claus.
© The Independent Singapore
Prof Lim’s fellow Sengkang MP, Louis Chua, along with other WP volunteers, carried out similar efforts.
“Christmas is the season of giving, and together with the help of our trusty volunteers, we hope our food distribution event earlier today helped to spread a little festive cheer to our residents!” he wrote in a Dec 19 Facebook post.
Jamus Lim plays ‘Sengkang Claus’ for Christmas and back-to-school event
Singapore — Workers’ Party Member of Parliament Jamus Lim, together with party volunteers, brought joy to some children by playing “Sengkang Claus” and distributing back-to-school packs.
“This weekend, our trusty #TeamSengkang volunteers organized our annual Christmas and back-to-school event, where we gave out book vouchers, cookies, child-sized masks, and other small gifts to school-aged children at our rental block in #Anchorvale.
Heartfelt thanks to our hardworking volunteers and all generous donors, including Xenium, as well as others that have chosen to remain anonymous. #SengkangGRC,” he wrote in a Dec 19 Facebook post.
Assoc Prof Lim posted photos of the festive event, including one of some masked WP volunteers.
Commenters expressed appreciation for their efforts, including some who made reference to WP members having had to appear before the Committee of Privileges in wake of the Raeesah Khan scandal.
Others even left positive comments about Prof Lim’s trim physique, saying he was too fit to play a traditional Santa Claus.
Prof Lim’s fellow Sengkang MP, Louis Chua, along with other WP volunteers, carried out similar efforts.
“Christmas is the season of giving, and together with the help of our trusty volunteers, we hope our food distribution event earlier today helped to spread a little festive cheer to our residents!” he wrote in a Dec 19 Facebook post.
from yahoo.com:
SINGAPORE — Former Sengkang Member of Parliament (MP) Raeesah Khan reiterated on Wednesday (22 December) that she was told by Workers' Party (WP) chief Pritam Singh to maintain the lies she had told in Parliament and to "take it to the grave".
Appearing before the Committee of Privileges (COP) for a third time, she was asked to respond to Singh's testimony that she had lied about being instructed by senior party leaders to keep up the deception. "Of course I completely disagree," said the 27-year-old in a strained voice.
"I have come here to tell the truth, and I’ve made an oath to do so as well, and I’ve never strayed from that," added Raeesah, stressing that the phrase "take it to the grave" was not one she would ordinarily use, and that it was Singh who had uttered it.
Raeesah resigned as an MP and WP member last month after admitting that she had lied about her interactions with an alleged sexual assault victim. The mother of two also took issue with Singh and WP chair Sylvia Lim's testimony that she was suffering from a mental condition, which could have affected her ability to tell the truth before the COP.
Alluding to their claim that she had been distraught at an 8 August meeting where she confessed her lies, Raeesah said, "If I was not able to have a discussion on this issue, then why would I be left on my own to make a decision as they have claimed?"
She added, "To use mental illness as a way to discredit someone, I think is extremely out of line.”
Raeesah also expressed concern that using a person’s mental health to discredit them (as Singh and Lim had done) would set back the movement to progress mental health awareness and support. Attributing such labels on people would discourage them from seeking help, when they needed it.
Earlier this month, Raeesah told the COP that Singh, Lim and WP vice-chair Faisal Manap had advised her to maintain the lie she told Parliament on 3 August about accompanying an alleged rape victim to a police station and her allegations over insensitive remarks by a police officer.
On Wednesday, Raeesah also disputed other aspects of the WP chief's testimony, reiterating that he had told her during a meeting at her home on 3 October that he would not judge her if she did not come clean about her lies.
She claimed that at the meeting, the Leader of the Opposition did not use the words “take ownership and responsibility” to her, nor did he tell her to clarify the lie in Parliament. She also confirmed that after Singh left her house, there was no further discussion on how she might approach the issue if it came up.
The following day, Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam confronted Raeesah on her allegations in Parliament. She confirmed that afterwards, when she met with him, she had indeed said, “Perhaps there is another way. That is, to tell the truth.”
She also agreed with Lim’s account, that Singh responded by asking Raeesah if she hadn’t already chosen a path. However, she claimed to be shocked by Singh’s response because there had been no intention or directive from him to tell the truth at that time.
During his testimony before the COP last Friday, Singh said that Raeesah had told the party's disciplinary panel that she might have disassociation, a psychological condition that affects one's sense of identity and perception of time. He then asked the COP to consider asking Raeesah to undergo a psychological assessment.
In this regard, psychiatrist Dr Christopher Cheok of the Institute of Mental Health assessed her twice in December. The acting chief of the Department of Forensic Psychiatry also interviewed Raeesah's husband, and closest next-of-kin, and reviewed the relevant recordings of Raeesah speaking in Parliament as well as her testimony before the COP.
Dr Cheok told the COP on Wednesday that in his assessment, Raeesah did not suffer from any significant psychiatric disorder that would have impaired her ability to speak truthfully during the relevant Parliament sittings or before the COP. She was of sound mind and knew what she was doing, he testified.
Asked about her mental state at the 3 August parliament sitting, Dr Cheok said that it was neither done impulsively, nor as a result of dissociation, or any other psychiatric disorder. It was possible that such untruths could be told as a result of bad judgement, rather than because of any mental illness.
He added that it was a normal reaction, for a sexual assault survivor to try to compartmentalise or suppress that memory. She does not suffer from any psychiatric disorder that would predispose her to telling untruths.
On his finding that Raeesah did not suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder or dissociation, Dr Cheok was asked to reconcile this with Singh, Lim, and Faisal's testimony that she would get emotional whenever her sexual assault was mentioned.
In response, he did not deny that while she had some symptoms of being psychologically traumatised, he was of the view that the symptoms did not reach the threshold of a psychiatric disorder. It was a normal reaction for someone who had gone through a traumatic experience, to continue to have some anxiety when speaking about the topic.
Separately, the trio of WP leaders were summoned to appear before the COP on Monday to produce any documents germane to Raeesah's conduct and the disciplinary panel convened to look into her. Pursuant to this, Singh, Lim and Faisal did so and produced certain documents.
They also confirmed in writing that they had produced all documents required by the COP.
I did not lie to COP, 'here to tell the truth': Ex-WP MP Raeesah Khan
SINGAPORE — Former Sengkang Member of Parliament (MP) Raeesah Khan reiterated on Wednesday (22 December) that she was told by Workers' Party (WP) chief Pritam Singh to maintain the lies she had told in Parliament and to "take it to the grave".
Appearing before the Committee of Privileges (COP) for a third time, she was asked to respond to Singh's testimony that she had lied about being instructed by senior party leaders to keep up the deception. "Of course I completely disagree," said the 27-year-old in a strained voice.
"I have come here to tell the truth, and I’ve made an oath to do so as well, and I’ve never strayed from that," added Raeesah, stressing that the phrase "take it to the grave" was not one she would ordinarily use, and that it was Singh who had uttered it.
Raeesah resigned as an MP and WP member last month after admitting that she had lied about her interactions with an alleged sexual assault victim. The mother of two also took issue with Singh and WP chair Sylvia Lim's testimony that she was suffering from a mental condition, which could have affected her ability to tell the truth before the COP.
Alluding to their claim that she had been distraught at an 8 August meeting where she confessed her lies, Raeesah said, "If I was not able to have a discussion on this issue, then why would I be left on my own to make a decision as they have claimed?"
She added, "To use mental illness as a way to discredit someone, I think is extremely out of line.”
Raeesah also expressed concern that using a person’s mental health to discredit them (as Singh and Lim had done) would set back the movement to progress mental health awareness and support. Attributing such labels on people would discourage them from seeking help, when they needed it.
3 Oct visit from Pritam Singh
Earlier this month, Raeesah told the COP that Singh, Lim and WP vice-chair Faisal Manap had advised her to maintain the lie she told Parliament on 3 August about accompanying an alleged rape victim to a police station and her allegations over insensitive remarks by a police officer.
On Wednesday, Raeesah also disputed other aspects of the WP chief's testimony, reiterating that he had told her during a meeting at her home on 3 October that he would not judge her if she did not come clean about her lies.
She claimed that at the meeting, the Leader of the Opposition did not use the words “take ownership and responsibility” to her, nor did he tell her to clarify the lie in Parliament. She also confirmed that after Singh left her house, there was no further discussion on how she might approach the issue if it came up.
The following day, Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam confronted Raeesah on her allegations in Parliament. She confirmed that afterwards, when she met with him, she had indeed said, “Perhaps there is another way. That is, to tell the truth.”
She also agreed with Lim’s account, that Singh responded by asking Raeesah if she hadn’t already chosen a path. However, she claimed to be shocked by Singh’s response because there had been no intention or directive from him to tell the truth at that time.
Psychiatrist testimony: Raeesah has no mental health condition
During his testimony before the COP last Friday, Singh said that Raeesah had told the party's disciplinary panel that she might have disassociation, a psychological condition that affects one's sense of identity and perception of time. He then asked the COP to consider asking Raeesah to undergo a psychological assessment.
In this regard, psychiatrist Dr Christopher Cheok of the Institute of Mental Health assessed her twice in December. The acting chief of the Department of Forensic Psychiatry also interviewed Raeesah's husband, and closest next-of-kin, and reviewed the relevant recordings of Raeesah speaking in Parliament as well as her testimony before the COP.
Dr Cheok told the COP on Wednesday that in his assessment, Raeesah did not suffer from any significant psychiatric disorder that would have impaired her ability to speak truthfully during the relevant Parliament sittings or before the COP. She was of sound mind and knew what she was doing, he testified.
Asked about her mental state at the 3 August parliament sitting, Dr Cheok said that it was neither done impulsively, nor as a result of dissociation, or any other psychiatric disorder. It was possible that such untruths could be told as a result of bad judgement, rather than because of any mental illness.
He added that it was a normal reaction, for a sexual assault survivor to try to compartmentalise or suppress that memory. She does not suffer from any psychiatric disorder that would predispose her to telling untruths.
On his finding that Raeesah did not suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder or dissociation, Dr Cheok was asked to reconcile this with Singh, Lim, and Faisal's testimony that she would get emotional whenever her sexual assault was mentioned.
In response, he did not deny that while she had some symptoms of being psychologically traumatised, he was of the view that the symptoms did not reach the threshold of a psychiatric disorder. It was a normal reaction for someone who had gone through a traumatic experience, to continue to have some anxiety when speaking about the topic.
Separately, the trio of WP leaders were summoned to appear before the COP on Monday to produce any documents germane to Raeesah's conduct and the disciplinary panel convened to look into her. Pursuant to this, Singh, Lim and Faisal did so and produced certain documents.
They also confirmed in writing that they had produced all documents required by the COP.
from msn.com:
SINGAPORE — There is a scene from presidential drama The West Wing that has been playing on this reporter's mind since the Workers' Party (WP) press conference of 2 December, when it was revealed that its senior party leadership first became aware of Raeesah Khan's lies in Parliament a few days after they were first uttered on 3 August.
"This is what happens when you put teenagers in the White House," declares an opposition lawmaker to two presidential aides who almost commit perjury in their attempts to defend a colleague for his alcoholism. "I'd like to hold hearings into the two of you being stupid."
While the context may be different, and it may seem harsh, those remarks could apply to just about every player in the ongoing Raeesah Khan saga, from the former Sengkang Member of Parliament to WP chief Pritam Singh to the eight-member Committee of Privileges (COP) tasked with investigating Raeesah's lies.
Simply put: no one in this barely believable affair has covered themselves in glory, bar the ingenious meme makers and perhaps the WP cadre members who testified. And with a sixth special report released by the COP on Wednesday evening (22 December), incorporating fresh testimony from Raeesah insisting that Singh and party leaders had instructed her to keep up the deception, the COP inquiry is beginning to look like it will rival that other long drawn-out saga also involving WP leaders: Aljunied-Hougang Town Council.
© Provided by Yahoo News PHOTO: Mediacock Singapore
Netizens have had a field day with the COP hearings, in particular the epic nine-hour interrogation of Singh by Minister for Culture, Community and Youth Edwin Tong,who sits on the COP. It essentially consisted of Tong levelling the same accusation over and over again – Singh was indecisive, if not complicit – and Singh responding with a constant refrain of "I disagree".
By comparison, Raeesah, the elected MP who had lied repeatedly in the House, was only questioned for around three hours in total over her three appearances before the COP. She first made serious allegations against her former party leaders in early December and doubled down on these claims on Wednesday.
Despite his repeated declarations that the COP has no agenda beyond a fact-finding mission, Tong's constant use of the legal term "I put it to you" and demands to "answer my question" often made the proceedings adversarial. The COP, which has only one opposition MP, also saw fit to release its first interim report without having first heard from the WP's senior leaders.
With proceedings resembling a courtroom drama, netizens ate up the Leader of the Opposition's sassy, almost smug performance. By comparison, Tong, a former Senior Counsel, looked almost bumbling, with long, convoluted – if reasonable – questions posed to the soundtrack of him furiously scrolling on his mouse.
It all made rich fodder for satire, from a 'movie trailer'on the Raeesah saga to a hilarious clip of Singh 'complaining' about discounted sushi at Don Don Donki. In particular, a meme playing on the old Gold 90FM ad, casting Tong in the role of the listener who wants to "only hear the good stuff", has been circulating.
As a colleague put it: you know you've lost the people when you become a meme.
© Provided by Yahoo News SCREENGRAB: Gov.sg YouTube channel
Lawyers would know that "I put it to you" is typically used in a cross-examination to advance a client's case. In the same manner, I put it to you that the court of public opinion has already made its ruling.
This is best summed up by one online wag’s comment, “Verdict looking for crime lah”. The COP can claim to be neutral till it is blue in the face: this will not change the perception among many netizens that it is acting in a partisan manner.
It does not matter how many more reports are written or witnesses questioned - the narrative has been set in stone. If the WP scored an own goal, then the COP has missed an open goal so far.
There are many questions to be asked of the COP. First and foremost, why did Tong take such a belligerent approach with Singh, while treating Raeesah with comparative kid gloves? His bizarre assertion that "I am entitled to put a hypothesis to you because we should test the evidence" was met with the perfect response from Singh, “You don’t test the evidence with a hypothesis, but go ahead.”
At the risk of stating the blindingly obvious, the COP is not a tribunal of court judges, and some of its members need to know they are not conducting a court hearing. Perhaps the public criticism of his conduct was one reason that Tong was far more cordial when he questioned WP chair Sylvia Lim after his verbal jousting with Singh.
COP hearings have now lasted more than 30 hours. The Committee has also sat for almost a month but has yet to come to any conclusions. Is this a reasonable or efficient use of taxpayers' money, especially when the questioning has been largely conducted by just three COP members, and there is still a pandemic raging?
Whatever the WP's supposed misdeeds, the perception of bullying is overshadowing it all.
Workers' Party chief and Aljunied Member of Parliament Pritam Singh testifies before the Committee of Privileges on Friday, 10 December 2021. (SCREENGRAB: Gov.sg YouTube channel)
On the flip side, there are equally pressing questions to be asked of the WP.
When Raeesah's allegations were first aired, some declared that this would mark the end of Singapore's largest opposition party. Instead, the LO's defiant refusal to back down has won him plaudits.
At times, he almost seemed to be playing it up for the cameras, knowing full well that the footage of his testimony would be released to the public. "Nice try, Mr Tong. You're a good lawyer, but I'm a good listener," he breezily said at one point.
One wonders if the LO would have been so combative if the questioning had been led by Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam, a man who would make**** the final courtoom scene in A Few Good Men look like a friendly chat with the auntie next door.
But Singh's performance helped obscure his inexplicable response to the whole affair, as well as the more pertinent findings from the COP hearings. It beggars belief that a politician as experienced and savvy as Singh left it to a rookie MP to decide when to clarify her lies in a Parliament dominated by an unforgiving PAP supermajority.
There was also the startling revelation that Singh, along with senior leaders, withheld the full facts on Raeesah's initial confession from their Central Executive Committee and party members, claiming that it was "not material" to their deliberations on Raeesah's fate.
Not to mention the LO's eyebrow-raising assertion that her claims about the alleged victim being mistreated at a police station did not adversely impact the police. As Tong might say, "Come on, Mr Singh."
SCREENGRAB: Gov.sg YouTube channel
At some point, the COP hearings will conclude and a report with the next course of action released. Given the way things have proceeded so far, the COP should think very carefully about what it says**** in its findings. Censure the WP and it will be accused of partisanship. Slap them on the wrist and people would ask what the point of the hearings was.
It is unlikely that the average PAP or WP supporter would have been swayed by the saga. Online comments suggest that many are already tired of the COP hearings, and a fair few are unconvinced that the WP leaders are guilty of any wrongdoing.
But for Singh and the WP, the real damage to the party has been internal. Much soul-searching about their candidate selection procedures and leadership culture is needed, while senior leaders will have their work cut out to regain the trust of rank and file members. The key question being: how could things have been allowed to come to this point?
For the WP's sake, for opposition politics and for Singapore, the WP leaders must come up with viable solutions to distance themselves from an ugly saga that has snowballed from a disgraced former MP's dishonesty
COMMENT: Meme makers have won the Raeesah Khan saga
SINGAPORE — There is a scene from presidential drama The West Wing that has been playing on this reporter's mind since the Workers' Party (WP) press conference of 2 December, when it was revealed that its senior party leadership first became aware of Raeesah Khan's lies in Parliament a few days after they were first uttered on 3 August.
"This is what happens when you put teenagers in the White House," declares an opposition lawmaker to two presidential aides who almost commit perjury in their attempts to defend a colleague for his alcoholism. "I'd like to hold hearings into the two of you being stupid."
While the context may be different, and it may seem harsh, those remarks could apply to just about every player in the ongoing Raeesah Khan saga, from the former Sengkang Member of Parliament to WP chief Pritam Singh to the eight-member Committee of Privileges (COP) tasked with investigating Raeesah's lies.
Simply put: no one in this barely believable affair has covered themselves in glory, bar the ingenious meme makers and perhaps the WP cadre members who testified. And with a sixth special report released by the COP on Wednesday evening (22 December), incorporating fresh testimony from Raeesah insisting that Singh and party leaders had instructed her to keep up the deception, the COP inquiry is beginning to look like it will rival that other long drawn-out saga also involving WP leaders: Aljunied-Hougang Town Council.
Memes and parodies
Netizens have had a field day with the COP hearings, in particular the epic nine-hour interrogation of Singh by Minister for Culture, Community and Youth Edwin Tong,who sits on the COP. It essentially consisted of Tong levelling the same accusation over and over again – Singh was indecisive, if not complicit – and Singh responding with a constant refrain of "I disagree".
By comparison, Raeesah, the elected MP who had lied repeatedly in the House, was only questioned for around three hours in total over her three appearances before the COP. She first made serious allegations against her former party leaders in early December and doubled down on these claims on Wednesday.
Despite his repeated declarations that the COP has no agenda beyond a fact-finding mission, Tong's constant use of the legal term "I put it to you" and demands to "answer my question" often made the proceedings adversarial. The COP, which has only one opposition MP, also saw fit to release its first interim report without having first heard from the WP's senior leaders.
With proceedings resembling a courtroom drama, netizens ate up the Leader of the Opposition's sassy, almost smug performance. By comparison, Tong, a former Senior Counsel, looked almost bumbling, with long, convoluted – if reasonable – questions posed to the soundtrack of him furiously scrolling on his mouse.
It all made rich fodder for satire, from a 'movie trailer'on the Raeesah saga to a hilarious clip of Singh 'complaining' about discounted sushi at Don Don Donki. In particular, a meme playing on the old Gold 90FM ad, casting Tong in the role of the listener who wants to "only hear the good stuff", has been circulating.
As a colleague put it: you know you've lost the people when you become a meme.
The narrative has been set
Lawyers would know that "I put it to you" is typically used in a cross-examination to advance a client's case. In the same manner, I put it to you that the court of public opinion has already made its ruling.
This is best summed up by one online wag’s comment, “Verdict looking for crime lah”. The COP can claim to be neutral till it is blue in the face: this will not change the perception among many netizens that it is acting in a partisan manner.
It does not matter how many more reports are written or witnesses questioned - the narrative has been set in stone. If the WP scored an own goal, then the COP has missed an open goal so far.
There are many questions to be asked of the COP. First and foremost, why did Tong take such a belligerent approach with Singh, while treating Raeesah with comparative kid gloves? His bizarre assertion that "I am entitled to put a hypothesis to you because we should test the evidence" was met with the perfect response from Singh, “You don’t test the evidence with a hypothesis, but go ahead.”
At the risk of stating the blindingly obvious, the COP is not a tribunal of court judges, and some of its members need to know they are not conducting a court hearing. Perhaps the public criticism of his conduct was one reason that Tong was far more cordial when he questioned WP chair Sylvia Lim after his verbal jousting with Singh.
COP hearings have now lasted more than 30 hours. The Committee has also sat for almost a month but has yet to come to any conclusions. Is this a reasonable or efficient use of taxpayers' money, especially when the questioning has been largely conducted by just three COP members, and there is still a pandemic raging?
Whatever the WP's supposed misdeeds, the perception of bullying is overshadowing it all.
Political theatre
On the flip side, there are equally pressing questions to be asked of the WP.
When Raeesah's allegations were first aired, some declared that this would mark the end of Singapore's largest opposition party. Instead, the LO's defiant refusal to back down has won him plaudits.
At times, he almost seemed to be playing it up for the cameras, knowing full well that the footage of his testimony would be released to the public. "Nice try, Mr Tong. You're a good lawyer, but I'm a good listener," he breezily said at one point.
One wonders if the LO would have been so combative if the questioning had been led by Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam, a man who would make**** the final courtoom scene in A Few Good Men look like a friendly chat with the auntie next door.
But Singh's performance helped obscure his inexplicable response to the whole affair, as well as the more pertinent findings from the COP hearings. It beggars belief that a politician as experienced and savvy as Singh left it to a rookie MP to decide when to clarify her lies in a Parliament dominated by an unforgiving PAP supermajority.
There was also the startling revelation that Singh, along with senior leaders, withheld the full facts on Raeesah's initial confession from their Central Executive Committee and party members, claiming that it was "not material" to their deliberations on Raeesah's fate.
Not to mention the LO's eyebrow-raising assertion that her claims about the alleged victim being mistreated at a police station did not adversely impact the police. As Tong might say, "Come on, Mr Singh."
Where does it all end?
At some point, the COP hearings will conclude and a report with the next course of action released. Given the way things have proceeded so far, the COP should think very carefully about what it says**** in its findings. Censure the WP and it will be accused of partisanship. Slap them on the wrist and people would ask what the point of the hearings was.
It is unlikely that the average PAP or WP supporter would have been swayed by the saga. Online comments suggest that many are already tired of the COP hearings, and a fair few are unconvinced that the WP leaders are guilty of any wrongdoing.
But for Singh and the WP, the real damage to the party has been internal. Much soul-searching about their candidate selection procedures and leadership culture is needed, while senior leaders will have their work cut out to regain the trust of rank and file members. The key question being: how could things have been allowed to come to this point?
For the WP's sake, for opposition politics and for Singapore, the WP leaders must come up with viable solutions to distance themselves from an ugly saga that has snowballed from a disgraced former MP's dishonesty
