The meeting, which is due to be held at the University of Wolverhampton on March 18, will allow the BJA members to have their say on proposals made in a report produced by governance expert Jonathan Hall.

The proposed changes to the statutes include a provision which would mean the chair of the Board will be chosen through a "criteria-based appointment process" rather than an election.

They will also be limited to a maximum of two four-year terms to "balance stability and the opportunity for fresh leadership" should the alterations be given the green light by the members.

Directors will still be elected but a new nomination process, conducted by the newly-established Nominations Committee, will open up the position to a wider range of people.

The BJA also plan to reduce the number of elected directors from four to three while increasing the amount of independent directors from three to four.

The recommendations were produced in Hall's report, which followed an extensive consultation process with the BJA membership last year.

The BJA have already begun a similar process by holding regional meetings across the country, where local clubs and officials are given the chance to meet senior members of the BJA as well as the author of the report.

The first meeting was held in the Midlands last month and the roadshow will conclude with the final gathering in Belfast on February 27.

In his report, Hall said the BJA needed to improve their engagement with their membership and urged them to clarify the roles and responsibilities of key staff within the governing body and Board of Directors.

He claimed the BJA's progress in enhancing their governance had been "clouded" by the debacle concerning the 2015 European Championships, which were stripped from Glasgow and instead held in Baku as part of the inaugural European Games.

A report by law firm Hamlins found former BJA chairman Kerrith Brown, who is now President of the International Mixed Martial Arts Federation, “almost entirely” responsible.

This decision, made by the European Judo Union (EJU), came as a result of a sponsorship agreement the BJA under Brown had entered into with the Ultimate Fighting Championship, which the EJU claimed did not meet their "values".

"Overall, the BJA’s governance is viewed as being in reasonably good shape," Hall wrote. 

"The report references the progress made both in terms of its decision making structures and its processes but states that, unfortunately, the situation surrounding the withdrawal of the European Championships has understandably clouded that progress and by commissioning this report, the BJA Board have demonstrated their desire to make further progress and improvements.

"The report states that if implemented, the recommendations should put the BJA in a good position in relation to the principles set out in the Charter for Sports Governance. 

"It remains to be seen if they will meet all the requirements of the new Sports Code which is due out in the autumn, but the recommendations should put the BJA in a much stronger position to do so."

The Hamlins report found Brown, who suffered the disgrace of being stripped of his bronze medal at the Seoul 1988 Olympics after testing positive for banned performance-enhancing drugs, had orchestrated a sponsorship agreement between the governing body and the Combat Sports Federation (CSF), which was brokering a deal with the Ultimate Fighting Championships, of which he was a director.

This represented a clear conflict of interest, the report said.

Brown was also accused of deliberately misleading the BJA Board, while chief executive Andrew Scoular was also implicated.

"This Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) is being held to discuss the changes to the Memorandum and Articles to meet the UK Sport (UKS) and Sport England (SE) Governance Standards," a BJA statement read.

"This follows extensive consultation with member clubs, and a report prepared by Jonathan Hall Associates, taking into consideration the British Judo Strategy, the Hamlin report recommendations and UKS/SE Code of Good Governance. 

"This code has some mandatory elements that National Governing Bodies of Sport and other agencies will need to comply with in order to access and receive public monies."