Legislature Supports ‘Change’ of Inaugural Venue

first_imgBecause the Capitol Building, which is undergoing renovation, is by law the venue for the presidential inauguration ceremony, the legislature was forced to legalize SKD Sports Complex as the venue for this historic instance.– Adopts, Signs ResolutionAmid controversy about what critics claim is ‘undoing history and tradition’ regarding the holding of a presidential inauguration outside of Monrovia – the seat of Government – the House of Representatives and the Senate have adopted and signed a Joint Resolution to change the venue and city of the 2018 Inauguration from the Capitol Building in Monrovia to the Samuel K. Doe Sports Complex in Paynesville, outside of Monrovia.Members of the both Houses adopted and affixed their signatures to the Joint Resolution on Friday, January 19, during the 1st Day Special Sitting of the 1st Session, for the inauguration of the 24th President-elect and Vice President-elect to be held at the Samuel K. Doe Sports Complex today, Monday, January 22, 2018.Partial view of the Capitol annex, soon to be completed.The resolution is styled: “A Joint Resolution LEG-001/2018 Adopted by the Senate and the Honorable House of Representatives in the 1st Regular Session of the 54th Legislature of the Republic of Liberia for the Holding of the Inauguration of the 24th President-elect and Vice President-elect of the Republic of Liberia to be held at the Samuel K. Doe Sports Complex in the City of Paynesville, Montserrado County, Republic of Liberia on January 22, 2018.”The resolution was aimed at legitimizing the SKD instead of the Capitol Building, because of ongoing construction of the two annexes of the Capitol Building, put at a cost of US$23 million, by the People’s Republic China (PRC).It has been reported that during the sitting of the 52nd Legislature, the law was amended to have the grounds of the Capitol Building – the Seat of the Legislature – be used as the inauguration venue.Share this:Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)last_img read more

Harbhajan Singh seeks legal advice over ‘Conflict of Interest’ issue

first_imgSenior India offspinner Harbhajan Singh on Thursday said he is seeking legal advise on the way ahead after BCCI Ombudsman Justice (Retd) AP Shah observed that the bowler should dissociate himself from sports apparel company ‘Bhajji Sports’, which supplies kits to domestic teams.Shah had investigated the ‘Conflict of Interest’ issues raised by activist Neeraj Gundey, who had filed a number of such complaints with the ‘Office of Ombudsman’.”I have received an e-mail communication from the Board. All I can say at this moment is that I am discussing the issue with my legal advisor. I will act according to his advice,” Harbhajan told PTI on Thursday. Also read: DDCA opposes Lodha committee recommendations The company ‘Bhajji Sports’ is owned by Mrs Avtar Kaur, who is the cricketer’s mother.When a senior BCCI official was asked, he said that if Harbhajan is not the owner, anyone else can run the company, he said: “As long as Harbhajan’s name does not feature among the owners of the company in any of the deeds, he will not be under the Conflict of Interest purview.”According to Justice (Retd) Shah’s observation: “The Ombudsman recommends that all concerned individuals (cricketers, selectors, coaches, and administrators) should be required to make standard disclosures about their affiliations in the context of the conflict of interest rules (which may pertain, for example, to cricket coaching/training academies, sports management companies, sports apparel manufacturers, etc).”If the disclosures reveal that an individual does have such an association, they may be asked to either terminate their association with such companies/academies, or asked to resign from their position as cricketer/selector/coach/administrator, as covered by the conflict of interest rules.”advertisementHowever, there was a big sigh of relief for former India captain Sourav Ganguly after Shah declared that the former batsman’s association as part-owner of Atletico de Kolkata doesn’t fall into Conflict of interest purview after the owners bought the Pune IPL team.”The Ombudsman is of the view that no case of conflict of interest has been established or made out against Mr Ganguly, and therefore, the matter is accordingly disposed of,” Justice Shah says in his order on Wednesday.Ganguly, in his reply, had made it clear that he had no commercial links with the new IPL franchise Rising Pune Supergiants even though he had a negligible share in Atletico de Kolkata.last_img read more