To begin with, this article has nothing to do with my personal feelings toward either APR FC or any local football club. It is about Rwandan football; how it is run, governed, and the integrity of the game itself. FERWAFA’s decision to award two trophies for the 2025/26 BK Pro League season may have been designed as a practical solution to an extraordinary situation, but it has triggered an uncomfortable debate within Rwandan football. For the first time in modern league football, one club will be crowned the overall league winner, while another will be recognised as the “national champion.” On one hand is Sudanese giant Al Hilal Omdurman, the runaway leaders, dominant from start to finish, and clearly the best team in the division. On the other is APR FC, the highest-ranked local side and therefore the club designated to carry Rwanda’s flag in next season’s CAF Champions League. The result is a compromise rarely, if ever, seen in modern league football: one champion by performance, another by nationality. According to a FERWAFA statement signed by federation president Fabrice Shema, this is part of a “special arrangement.” And while FERWAFA can explain the mechanics of the arrangement, they cannot avoid the deeper question now confronting Rwandan football: what exactly does it mean to be national champions if you did not actually win the league? The logic behind the arrangement is understandable - even reasonable - from an administrative standpoint. But it also raises uncomfortable questions. When Sudan’s domestic football structure collapsed because of civil conflict, Rwanda offered refuge to two of the country’s biggest clubs, Al Hilal Omdurman and Al Merrikh SC. It was both a gesture of solidarity and an opportunity. The presence of the Sudanese heavyweights elevated the league’s competitiveness, increased its visibility, and attracted attention far beyond Rwanda’s borders. But from the very beginning, there was always an obvious regulatory complication. In an article published on November 14, 2025, I raised the question of how the champion would be determined should Al Hilal or Al Merrikh win the league. CAF competitions are reserved for clubs affiliated with their own national associations, meaning Rwanda cannot send a Sudanese club to represent it in continental football. The league therefore needed a mechanism that separated sporting merit from national representation. That is probably where the idea of two trophies emerged. But are two trophies really necessary? FERWAFA’s reasoning is simple: the overall winner should be recognised for sporting excellence, while the best Rwandan side should receive the country’s official continental slot and the domestic financial rewards tied to local football development. From a governance perspective, there is logic to this. Yet from a professional football standpoint, there can only be one winner, and only the winner can be declared champion. You cannot become champions by finishing second or third. But it is what it is. The Rwf80 million winner’s prize money comes from a Rwandan competition funded for the benefit of Rwandan football. It would be difficult to justify allocating domestic development funds to guest clubs that may leave the league once stability returns to Sudan. Likewise, CAF registration rules make it impossible for non-Rwandan clubs to occupy Rwanda’s Champions League slot. Administratively, therefore, the solution attempts to protect everyone’s interests. But football is not governed by administrative logic alone. It is also governed by emotion, symbolism, credibility, and competitive integrity. And for me, and probably many others, that is where the controversy begins. Because no matter how FERWAFA frames it, supporters understand one universal football truth: the champions are the team that finish first. Not second. Not the best local side. If Al Hilal finish 11, 14, or even fewer points clear, score the most goals, and dominate the league from beginning to end, then they are the undisputed champions of Rwanda’s top flight. Any additional trophy handed elsewhere inevitably feels secondary or symbolic. That is the uncomfortable reality. It also places APR, who are favourites to finish second, or at worst in the top three, in an awkward position. Even if they are officially crowned Rwandan champions for a record-extending 24th time and seventh consecutive season, the football public will remember that they did not win the league outright. In fact, there remains a possibility that APR may not even finish second if Al Merrikh overtake them. Can a club genuinely celebrate a league title after finishing behind two foreign guest teams? Technically, perhaps yes. Emotionally and historically, it becomes far more complicated. That is why this arrangement risks damaging the image of the Rwanda Premier League, even if unintentionally. In the eyes of many, apart from APR supporters, the army side cannot be declared champions without actually winning the league outright. Yes, they can receive the Rwf80 million prize money and represent Rwanda in the CAF Champions League, but in terms of claiming a 24th league title, this season ought to be considered a “dead season.” For years, Rwanda has worked hard to present itself as an organised, ambitious, and steadily improving football nation. The league has invested in professionalism, broadcasting, and continental competitiveness. But this season’s conclusion creates the impression that local clubs are being protected from sporting failure through administrative adjustments. In any case, why did FERWAFA wait until the final three matches to announce the so-called “special arrangement” regarding the league winners and the designation of national champions? This should have been clarified at the start of the season to avoid unnecessary suspicions and conspiracy theories. Announcing it at the tail end of the campaign raises more questions than answers. The optics matter. To outsiders, it may appear that Rwanda’s biggest club is being rewarded despite being unable to outperform invited teams playing away from home and under extraordinary circumstances. It also risks creating the perception that league positions are not absolute, particularly in relation to the current campaign. And that is dangerous territory for any competition. Leagues derive legitimacy from simplicity: the table determines the champion. Once exceptions emerge, confusion follows. CAF’s decision to declare Morocco AFCON 2025 champions despite losing to Senegal comes to mind. Yet there is also a strong argument that FERWAFA had little or no alternative. Had the Sudanese clubs been excluded from the title race altogether, critics would have accused the league of turning them into glorified exhibition participants. Their matches would lose competitive meaning. The integrity of the fixtures themselves would be questioned. Allowing them to compete fully was the fairest sporting solution. But allowing them to represent Rwanda in CAF competitions was impossible. So, the authorities settled for a compromise that attempts to satisfy both sporting merit and regulatory necessity. Whether that compromise succeeds will largely depend on how history remembers this season. If this arrangement remains a one-off emergency measure tied to Sudan’s extraordinary situation, as it should, it may eventually be viewed as an unusual but understandable chapter in Rwandan football history. That is why FERWAFA must be careful, moving forward. Emergency solutions should remain exactly that: emergency solutions. Football thrives on clarity. Fans must always know what they are competing for, what constitutes success, and who the true champions are. In truth, there can only be one genuine winner of the 2025/26 BK Pro League season. And on the pitch, that team is Al Hilal. Everything else is administration, for there can never be two winners of a single competition.
