分类： politics

Singapore’s political landscape witnessed a significant shift as Prime Minister Lawrence Wong formally revoked Pritam Singh’s designation as Leader of the Opposition on Thursday. This decisive action follows Parliament’s approval of a motion declaring the Workers’ Party secretary-general “unsuitable” for the role due to his recent conviction for providing false testimony to a parliamentary committee.

The 49-year-old opposition leader, who rose to prominence as part of Singapore’s new generation of politicians challenging the long-dominant People’s Action Party (PAP), maintains his parliamentary seat despite the demotion. The controversy stems from Singh’s handling of former WP lawmaker Raeesah Khan, who admitted to lying in Parliament about a sexual assault case. During subsequent investigations, Khan testified that party leaders, including Singh, instructed her to maintain the false narrative despite knowing the truth.

Singh’s political journey represents both the growth and challenges facing Singapore’s opposition. Educated at the National University of Singapore and King’s College London, the practicing lawyer entered Parliament in 2011 and assumed leadership of the center-left Workers’ Party in 2018. Under his guidance, the party expanded its parliamentary presence to 12 out of 108 seats—the strongest opposition representation in Singapore’s history.

In 2020, Singh achieved a milestone when then-Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong formally established the Leader of the Opposition position and appointed him to the role. This contrasted with his predecessor Low Thia Khiang’s rejection of an unofficial version of the title in 2011, which he deemed “belittling” without formal recognition.

Despite initially receiving cross-party welcome—including symbolic gestures like appearing in the then-PM’s selfie and joining official delegations—Singh’s tenure has been marred by escalating controversies. Following his February 2025 conviction and failed appeal last December, lawmakers debated for three hours before passing the motion that ultimately cost him his title. The motion argued that retaining Singh would “undermine the standing of parliament and public confidence in the integrity of Singapore’s political system.”

During parliamentary debates, Singh maintained his innocence while accepting the court’s judgment, stating his “conscience will always be clear” regarding the charges. He emphasized that the opposition leader title lacked legal foundation and asserted he had never “hankered” for it. The politician has vowed to continue serving as MP for his constituency, signaling ongoing participation in Singapore’s political arena despite this setback.

Beijing’s highest governmental body has convened to thoroughly analyze President Xi Jinping’s pivotal address delivered at the Communist Party’s central disciplinary plenum. The meeting of the State Council’s leading Party members group, chaired by Premier Li Qiang on January 14, 2026, brought together senior officials including Vice-Premier Ding Xuexiang to deliberate on the implementation guidelines emanating from the Fifth Plenary Session of the 20th CPC Central Commission for Discipline Inspection.

The assembly recognized substantial advancements achieved throughout the previous year in enhancing administrative integrity, refining official conduct, and intensifying anti-corruption measures. Participants underscored the necessity of maintaining this momentum throughout 2026 to establish a robust foundation for the successful launch of the nation’s 15th Five-Year Plan.

Critical emphasis was placed on adopting a comprehensive strategy that addresses both superficial manifestations and fundamental causes of corruption, particularly in sectors identified as high-risk for recurrent or severe misconduct. The meeting further highlighted the imperative of vigilantly identifying and countering emerging forms of corruption that may manifest through novel or concealed methodologies, ensuring the continued integrity of governance structures.

Chinese mainland authorities have sharply criticized Taiwan’s Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) for propagating what they characterize as fabricated ‘infiltration’ narratives. Zhu Fenglian, spokeswoman for the State Council Taiwan Affairs Office, addressed these claims during a Wednesday press conference, labeling the DPP’s assertions as both misleading and deliberately malicious.

The controversy emerged following recent statements from DPP officials regarding the use of mainland Chinese expressions in everyday Taiwanese contexts. DPP Secretary-General Hsu Kuo-yung asserted that such linguistic practices, while seemingly minor, could collectively constitute a form of ‘cultural infiltration’ that threatens Taiwan’s distinctive identity.

This rhetoric has manifested in tangible consequences, including the online harassment of a Keelung dessert shop that incorporated mainland terminology for green grapes in its menu offerings. Zhu characterized these developments as irrational and pathological, attributing them directly to the DPP’s political agenda of eliminating Chinese cultural elements from Taiwanese society.

The spokeswoman further condemned the DPP’s educational policies, noting the implementation of ‘Taiwan independence’ curricula and textbooks that seek to reconstruct historical narratives. She emphasized that Chinese culture remains the shared heritage of all compatriots across the Strait, encompassing language, writing systems, and traditional celebrations.

In a related development, Zhu addressed a recent report from Taiwan’s security department alleging mainland use of artificial intelligence and big data analytics for disinformation campaigns. She dismissed these claims as factual distortions designed to foster anti-China sentiment and divert attention from the DPP’s governance challenges.

The DPP has concurrently pursued legislative measures to counter perceived infiltration, including proposed amendments to strengthen the 2020 ‘anti-infiltration act.’ Zhu characterized this legislation as a political tool for suppressing opposition and intimidating Taiwan residents, ultimately serving separatist objectives while restricting cross-Strait exchanges and undermining fundamental freedoms.

A Seoul court announced on Wednesday that it will render its verdict on February 19 in the landmark insurrection trial of former South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol, following prosecutors’ unprecedented demand for capital punishment. The Seoul Central District Court’s declaration came after an exhaustive 17-hour final hearing session, setting the stage for a historic judicial decision that could reshape the nation’s political landscape.

Prosecutors characterized Yoon’s December 2024 declaration of martial law as “a severe demolition of constitutional order orchestrated by anti-state forces.” The special counsel team asserted that Yoon had weaponized the state of emergency as an instrument to consolidate power and establish prolonged authoritarian rule, actions they described as fundamentally violating national security principles and civil liberties.

The prosecution emphasized that Yoon had demonstrated no genuine remorse or acceptance of responsibility for the constitutional crisis, compelling them to seek the maximum penalty under South Korean law. During the proceedings, the former president maintained composure, offering a faint smile upon hearing the death penalty request before reiterating his unwavering claim of innocence.

Yoon contended that his implementation of constitutional emergency powers represented a legitimate presidential action to safeguard national interests rather than an attempted insurrection. He argued the martial law declaration aimed to alert citizens to genuine national security threats rather than establish military dictatorship.

The Blue House, official residence of current President Lee Jae-myung, issued a statement expressing confidence that the judiciary would deliver a ruling consistent with legal principles and public expectations. Presiding Judge Ji Gwi-yeon affirmed the court’s commitment to adjudicating based strictly on constitutional provisions, statutory law, and evidentiary considerations.

Legal experts note the symbolic significance of the prosecution’s capital punishment request despite South Korea’s de facto moratorium on executions since 1997. Hongik University law professor Cho Hee-kyong explained that insurrection remains technically punishable by death under the Criminal Act, and anything less than the maximum penalty request might have signaled inadequate seriousness about the constitutional violations.

While most analysts anticipate a life imprisonment sentence, the court retains discretion to consider historical precedents including the 1996 death penalty verdict against former president Chun Doo-hwan for coup-related offenses, which was later commuted to life imprisonment. Yoon’s persistent denial of wrongdoing may serve as an aggravating factor in sentencing determinations.

In an unprecedented political development, Singapore’s parliament has formally removed Pritam Singh from his position as Leader of the Opposition following his criminal conviction for providing false testimony under oath. The decisive parliamentary vote occurred on Wednesday, with the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) using its substantial majority to pass the motion.

The resolution stemmed from Singh’s conviction last February for lying to a parliamentary committee investigating a separate case involving former Workers’ Party (WP) lawmaker Raeesah Khan. Despite maintaining his innocence throughout the judicial process and an unsuccessful appeal in December, Singh was found to have committed perjury during committee hearings.

While Singh retains his parliamentary seat and position as secretary-general of the Workers’ Party, he will forfeit significant privileges including additional financial allowances and priority speaking rights during legislative debates. The opposition leader defended himself during the three-hour debate, stating his “conscience remains clear” and rejecting characterizations of his behavior as “dishonourable and unbecoming.”

Prime Minister Lawrence Wong declared on Thursday that Singh’s continued tenure as Opposition Leader had become “no longer tenable” given the circumstances. All eleven present WP members voted against the motion, highlighting the partisan divide within the legislature.

The controversy originated in 2021 when then-WP lawmaker Raeesah Khan fabricated an account of police misconduct toward a sexual assault victim. During subsequent investigations, evidence emerged suggesting Singh had instructed Khan to maintain the false narrative. Khan has since resigned from politics and received fines for her misconduct.

This case represents one of the rare criminal convictions against a sitting opposition politician in Singapore’s history and has reignited debates about judicial independence in the city-state. Critics have previously alleged that Singapore’s government weaponizes legal mechanisms against political opponents—accusations that authorities consistently deny.