[Community-Discuss] Bylaws changes

[Alan Barrett]

> On 13 Nov 2016, at 09:44, Badru Ntege <badru.ntege at nftconsult.com> wrote:
> Its usually good practice for the member not to participate in the issue at all and at times they are not even in the room.  I tend to prefer the option where the conflicted member is not involved at all in the discussion.

Yes, that is usually a good idea, but it’s sometimes a bad idea, so it should not be forced in every case.  Perhaps the remaining members of the Baord could be given the choice, like this:

[15.6 or other new number for new article]	A director of the company shall, where he/she has a potential conflict of interest in any matter brought before the Board, disclose such potential conflict to the Board.  Said Director shall recuse himself/herself from voting on any such matter before the Board where a conflict exists.  The remaining members of the Board may decide that the conflicted Director should also be excluded from discussion of the matter.


Alan Barrett