High Court: FKF Premier League 2019 Regulations Apply, Mariga Urges Compliance

• FKF Vice President MacDonald Mariga called for adherence to High Court rulings, seemingly favoring the 2019 regulations for the 2026/27 Premier League season.
• The league's start was delayed by a Nairobi High Court stay order concerning Kariobangi Sharks' relegation under the 2025/26 rules.
• A Murang'a High Court ruling subsequently ordered the league to proceed under the 2019 guidelines, which cap foreign players at five, unlike the 2025/26 rules.
• This conflicting directive creates significant compliance issues for clubs, particularly regarding foreign player limits, and highlights broader governance concerns.
• Mariga expressed concern for the mental anguish of players and the need for clear, lawful administrative structures for the league.

This sudden shift creates significant compliance challenges and potential contractual issues for affected teams, highlighting the urgent need for clarity regarding the legally binding regulations for the 2026/27 season.

Football Kenya Federation (FKF) Vice President MacDonald Mariga recently urged stakeholders to adhere to High Court directives concerning the regulations governing the upcoming 2026/27 Premier League season. His statement, issued on August 31, 2026, underscored a preference for the application of the 2019 rules, calling for collective respect for judicial decisions and collaborative efforts to resolve the ongoing league stalemate. This intervention comes amidst significant uncertainty surrounding the league's commencement, which saw the FKF release fixtures for Matchweek 1 on the same day, a decision many clubs deemed premature.

The league's initial start date of August 29 was postponed following a stay order issued by the High Court in Nairobi. This injunction was granted pending the resolution of a legal challenge against the relegation of Kariobangi Sharks, a club owned by Nick Mwendwa. The Kariobangi Sharks relegation case highlights the core of the dispute: under the FKF's 2025/26 guidelines, the bottom three teams are automatically relegated to the National Super League (NSL), with the top three NSL teams gaining automatic promotion.

However, the FKF Premier League 2019 regulations offer a different pathway for survival. Had these earlier rules been in effect, Kariobangi Sharks, who finished 16th, would have faced Mombasa United, the third-placed team in the NSL, in a playoff match to determine their top-tier status. This fundamental difference in relegation criteria forms the crux of the legal challenge, creating a volatile environment for clubs and the league's administration.

The legal landscape surrounding the Kenya football league court order is further complicated by conflicting judicial pronouncements. Kariobangi Sharks had previously sought recourse from the Sports Disputes Tribunal (SDT), but their appeal was unsuccessful. The Sports Disputes Tribunal FKF ruling affirmed that the FKF had conducted proper public participation regarding the 2025/26 regulations before their ratification by the National Executive Committee. This ruling initially seemed to validate the newer guidelines.

However, a subsequent High Court ruling from Murang'a, delivered on a Friday evening, introduced a new layer of complexity. This court order mandated that the league proceed, but specifically under the framework of the 2019 guidelines. This directive directly contradicted the implications of the SDT's earlier decision and plunged the league into further disarray, intensifying the FKF 2025/26 regulations dispute.

The immediate practical consequence of the Murang'a High Court's decision is particularly acute for clubs that had structured their rosters based on the 2025/26 regulations. The newer rules permitted clubs to sign more than five foreign players, a provision now invalidated by the High Court's insistence on the 2019 guidelines, which strictly capped foreign players at five. This sudden shift creates significant compliance challenges and potential contractual issues for affected teams, highlighting the urgent need for clarity regarding the legally binding regulations for the 2026/27 season.

MacDonald Mariga's FKF statement extended beyond the immediate regulatory conflict, lamenting the broader lack of robust administrative and governance structures within the league. He expressed concern that this systemic deficiency places both clubs and players at a considerable disadvantage. Mariga emphasized that merely starting the league is insufficient; it must commence on a foundation that is "clear, lawful and administratively sound."

Clubs, having invested substantial resources in preparing for the season, are entitled to certainty regarding the competition calendar, rules, and overall structures. The ongoing dispute, exacerbated by the High Court's conflicting rulings, directly undermines this essential certainty. Mariga, drawing from his extensive experience in football, also voiced deep empathy for the mental anguish experienced by players caught in this institutional tug-of-war.

He articulated the profound significance of the sport to players, clubs, coaches, supporters, and aspiring young Kenyans, expressing pain that this passion is being overshadowed by disagreements and a perceived "non-adherence to the FKF constitution." The current environment underscores critical issues of Kenya sports law compliance and governance, demanding a swift and definitive resolution to safeguard the integrity and future of the sport.

Legal counsel for Kenyan football clubs, players, or sports organizations must urgently ascertain which set of FKF regulations (2019 or 2025/26) is legally binding for the 2026/27 season, given the conflicting High Court rulings. This directly impacts club compliance, player contracts (e.g., foreign player limits), and potential litigation risks arising from the ongoing governance dispute.

Source: Reporting on Kenya's football league dispute