Arbitrability is a cornerstone concept in the field of arbitration. Yet, its nuanced characteristics introduce a plethora of complexities and challenges. The concept has been subject to a series of scholarly debates leading to the emergence of six distinct definitions. Each of these interpretations underscores a specific facet of arbitrability, illustrating its intricate and multifaceted essence. The diversity in perspectives accentuates the need for a comprehensive and detailed exploration. To uphold the rigour, flexibility and standards of international arbitration, it is crucial to ensure that the interpretation and application of arbitrability remain robust and adaptable.The enactment of Rwanda’s Arbitration Act in 2008 represented a notable advance in the establishment of a comprehensive and resilient arbitration structure inside the nation. Nevertheless, the evident absence of clarity about the notion of arbitrability presents significant difficulties, particularly when contemplating the aspirations of the Kigali International Arbitration Centre (KIAC) to establish Rwanda as a prominent international centre for commercial arbitration on a worldwide scale. The presence of ambiguity in the interpretation and application of arbitration agreements is likely to to result in diverse interpretations and discrepancies in Rwanda. The potential for unforeseen legal complications arising from this unpredictability may deviate from the fundamental objective of arbitration, which is to provide parties with a prompt, effective, and mutually satisfactory method for resolving disputes.There may be salvation, however, to be found in the rich legal fabrics of both the English and French legal systems. The English system, renowned for its rigorous legal principles and vast jurisprudential precedent, offers an abundance of clarity on arbitrable matters. It is important to show that these well-established guidelines could serve as key examples for Rwanda to build upon. In contrast, the French system, characterized by its broad, pro-arbitration approach, provides insights into marrying flexibility with legal clarity. The amalgamation of the strengths of both legal systems could offer Rwanda a roadmap to refine its own arbitration framework. Exploring and embracing elements from these advanced legal frameworks offers Rwanda a pathway to refine and clarify the vague areas within its 2008 Arbitration Act. Such steps promise to bolster the effectiveness and foreseeability of KIAC’s activities. Crucially, by actively seeking to align its arbitration mechanisms with globally accepted standards, Rwanda will be poised to elevate international confidence in its arbitration landscape, marking its commitment to arbitration excellence on a global stage.