Introduction

Many of our community contests today start with good intentions aimed at rewarding talent, encouraging participation, supporting it, and funding awards transparently, yet a growing trend, 'pay-to-vote', raises a quiet fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) question. While Islām commands and preaches lending support to one another, it becomes a necessity to answer the potent jurisprudential question: when does supporting become maysir (gambling)? The concept of a pay-to-vote or pay-to-vote arrangement is simply paying a certain amount of money to be eligible to cast vote for your favourite contestant. By the arrangement, if voters pay, one of the contestants wins and the others. Notably, the prize or award to be won comes from those payments gathered from all supporters. Hence, the poser: if the arrangement is such, are we unknowingly recreating the very gambling (maysir) Islām strictly forbids? While the intent is to honour merit, the mechanisms warrant scrutiny under Islamic law. This written piece concisely examines why Islamic jurists classify pay-to-vote schemes as a modern form of maysir (gambling) and what halāl (lawful) alternatives exist.

Pay-to-vote and the concept of tabarru' (donations, contributions)

It is clear that a major reason behind pay-to-vote is financing. Yet, the Qur'ān is not silent on such affairs (see Q6 vs 38, Al-An'ām). The Qur-ān in Chapter 5 vs 2 (Surah Al-Māidah) commands lending support in righteousness and forbids lending support in activities prohibited by the Shari'ah. Apparently, pay-to-vote is gradually gaining popularity in the contemporary world due to its viability in raising funds for its purpose. The question remains whether it is a praiseworthy arrangement or blameworthy under the lense of Islamic law. To determine this, understanding the structure of pay-to-vote becomes essential. In addition to the description already given in the introduction, the structure is straightforward: contestants lobby for votes, each voter pays a nominal fee such as fifty (50) naira, and the pooled funds are used to procure the award or prize for the winner. It is a pay-based contest by supporters (though not directly by the contestants themselves) aiming at drawing the prize or award target to a specific contestant or contestants at the end of the contest. While a contest (musābaqah) is allowed to some extent under the Shari’ah, the process or processes involved must be Shari'ah-compliant. It must be free from ribā, harām subject matter and maysir (gambling), which includes gharar (uncertainty). The presence of any of these in any contractual arrangement and engagement nullifies any outcome from it. Hence, while lending support to others, it should be free from ribā, maysir and harām-based dealings.

Understanding Maysir (Gambling)

What is maysir? 'Maysir' means gambling. It is a risk-based arrangement where one party gains at the expense of another through chance, speculation or uncertainty (gharar), without engaging in real economic activity or productive efforts. It is a situation where participants in an exercise or activity stake something of value, and the winner or winners takes the gain while others incur losses. It is on this premise that sport betting and lotteries are classified as prohibitions.

The Law-Giver in Q5 vs 90 (Al-Māidah) prohibits engaging in activities having elements of gambling (maysir). He says:

يَآأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوٓاْ إِنَّمَا ٱلۡخَمۡرُ وَٱلۡمَيۡسِرُ وَٱلۡأَنصَابُ وَٱلۡأَزۡلَٰمُ رِجۡسࣱ مِّنۡ عَمَلِ ٱلشَّيۡطَٰنِ فَٱجۡتَنِبُوهُ لَعَلَّكُمۡ تُفۡلِحُونَ
O you who have believed, indeed, intoxicants, gambling, [sacrificing on] stone altars [to other than Allāh], and divining arrows are but defilement from the work of Satan; so avoid it that you may be successful.

To wrap up this part, a competition arrangement where more than one competitor stake something of value, while the winner or winners among the contestants take all or part of the staked property, based on the arrangement. The same concern arises where the prize is funded not directly by the contestants but by their supporters, since the economic reality remains that multiple persons contribute property into a common fund from which only the successful contestant(s) ultimately benefits.

Why is pay-to-vote classified as a form of maysir?

In Islām, we go beyond the naming or appearance in drawing a conclusion on the permissibility or otherwise of a contractual arrangement. A contest is a form of arrangement among persons toward achieving a goal. It is contractual in nature, as non-participants are precluded from the effect of the outcome. Having an interest in a contestant does not guarantee having a stake in the contest outcome itself. Whatever a Muslim does or partakes in must be halāl (lawful); otherwise, he would be regarded as a sinner for that act.

To repaint the pay-to-vote arrangement, voters pay a minimum sum to be eligible to vote or for their vote to count, but they don’t get anything back. Their stake (termed as `iwad) is in support of a specific contestant while all the resources pulled together go to the person or persons who win the contest with the highest vote. The “prize” goes to a contestant or winners of the voting contest. Contestants do not pay, but they benefit from others’ (their supporters) payments.

Pay-to-vote contests resemble maysir because:
1. Supporters contribute money as a condition for participating in the voting process.
2. These contributions collectively finance or facilitate the prize awarded to successful contestants.
3. The identity of the winning contestant is uncertain at the time of contribution.
4. The ultimate benefit accrues to only the successful contestant(s), while the contributors receive no corresponding proprietary benefit.

This mirrors the rationale underlying the prohibition of participant-funded competitions recognised by contemporary juristic bodies.

Furthermore, a closer examination of pay-to-vote arrangements reveals several features commonly associated with maysir in juristic discourse. These include compulsory financial contributions linked to participation, the uncertain allocation of benefits based on the outcome of the contest, and the financing or facilitation of the winner's benefit through contributions made by others. Each of these features is briefly examined below:

a) Risking wealth upon an uncertain outcome: One of the hallmarks of maysir is that wealth is placed at risk upon an outcome that is uncertain at the time of participation, such that one party ultimately gains while another bears the corresponding loss. In many pay-to-vote schemes, supporters are required to pay money as a condition for voting. These contributions are made in support of a preferred contestant, yet whether the supported contestant ultimately benefits depends on the uncertain outcome of the contest. Consequently, supporters place wealth into an arrangement whose economic benefit is contingent upon the success or failure of their preferred contestant.

b) Compulsory stake contributions without guaranteed corresponding return: One of the hallmarks of maysir is the commitment of wealth to a contest or arrangement in which the allocation of benefits depends upon an uncertain outcome. In many pay-to-vote schemes, supporters are required to pay a fee as a condition for participating in the voting process. These contributions collectively facilitate or finance the prize ultimately awarded to the successful contestant(s). The contributors receive no guaranteed proprietary return for their payments, while the contestant supported by them may or may not emerge victorious. Consequently, wealth is committed to an arrangement in which the benefit ultimately enjoyed by the winner is linked to the uncertain outcome of the contest and is derived, directly or indirectly, from the contributions of multiple persons.

c) Uncertain allocation of benefits: In pay-to-vote arrangements, contributions are made before the outcome of the contest is known. At the time of payment, neither the contestants nor their supporters know who will ultimately emerge victorious and enjoy the benefit attached to the contest and financed, directly or indirectly, through the contributions made. Consequently, the allocation of the benefit generated through the contributions remains uncertain until the contest is concluded. Viewed together with the compulsory contributions required for participation and the financing of the winner's benefit through the contributions of others, this uncertainty reinforces the resemblance between the arrangement and maysir.

A pay-to-vote contest displays all of the foregoing features. Accordingly, particularly where the winner's benefit is wholly or partly financed through compulsory contributions made by supporters, the arrangement bears a strong resemblance to participant-funded competitions regarded as forms of maysir.

What should be a Muslim's action against a pay-to-vote arrangement?

A contest in Islamic jurisprudence could be halāl (lawful) or harām (unlawful). For the reasons advanced above, a pay-to-vote contest bears a strong resemblance to the participant-funded competitions that contemporary juristic authorities, including the Accounting and Auditing Organization for Islamic Financial Institutions (AAOIFI) and the International Islamic Fiqh Academy (IIFA), have classified as forms of maysir. While many participants may not immediately appreciate the juristic implications of such arrangements, the Muslim is encouraged to exercise caution in matters that may involve prohibited elements. This is evidenced by the prophetic tradition that goes thus:

إِنَّ الْحَلاَلَ بَيِّنٌ وَإِنَّ الْحَرَامَ بَيِّنٌ وَبَيْنَهُمَا مُشْتَبِهَاتٌ لاَ يَعْلَمُهُنَّ كَثِيرٌ مِنَ النَّاسِ. فَمَنِ اتَّقَى الشُّبُهَاتِ اسْتَبْرَأَ لِدِينِهِ وَعِرْضِهِ وَمَنْ وَقَعَ فِي الشُّبُهَاتِ وَقَعَ فِي الْحَرَامِ...
Verily, the lawful (halal) is clear, and the unlawful (haram) is clear, and between the two of them are doubtful matters about which many people do not know. things doubtful which many people do not know. So he who guards against doubtful things keeps his religion and honour blameless, and he who indulges in doubtful things indulges, in fact, in unlawful things...

Moving further, Allāh in An-Nahl Q 16:43 commands us to seek clarity from the people of knowledge before taking a step further. He says:

...فَسۡئَلُوٓاْ أَهۡلَ ٱلذِّكۡرِ إِن كُنتُمۡ لَا تَعۡلَمُونَ
...So ask the people of the message [i.e., former scriptures] if you do not know.

In a more restrictive sense, Allah in Q49 vs 1 (Al-Hujurat) cautioned against spreading or facilitating what is prohibited by Allah, including the hidden gambling (maysir) in a pay-to-vote contest scheme. Allah, the Sublime, says:

يَآأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ لَا تُقَدِّمُواْ بَيۡنَ يَدَيِ ٱللَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِۦۖ وَٱتَّقُواْ ٱللَّهَۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ سَمِيعٌ عَلِيمࣱ
O you who have believed, do not put [yourselves] before Allāh and His Messenger but fear Allāh. Indeed, Allāh is Hearing and Knowing.

This verse reminds believers that their conduct must conform to the guidance of Allah and His Messenger, particularly in matters whose permissibility is in doubt.

Furthermore, a pay-to-vote arrangement is not only a form of hidden maysir (gambling); it may create inequity by allowing financial capacity to influence the outcome of a contest. There is a chance of a well-off party influencing, perhaps by way of sponsorship colourisation, voters since paying a specified money sum is a condition precedent to voting right.

Flowing therefrom, it is incumbent on every Muslim to be aware and cautious of every contest he enters into, participates in and solicits or gives support to. He should always reflect on the command of Allāh in Q49 vs 1 (Al-Hujurāt) cited above and the prophet tradition on the importance of verifying the permissibility of an act before entering into it.

Conclusion

Allāh, the Sublime, prohibits maysir (gambling) because of its harmful consequences, including the creation of enmity and division among people and its tendency to distract from the remembrance of Allāh and the performance of worship. The Prophet (SAW) likewise informed us that a servant shall not move on the Day of Resurrection until he is questioned about, among other things, his wealth—how he acquired it and how he spent it. This reinforces the Sharī'ah objective (maqṣad) of preserving wealth (ḥifẓ al-māl) and underscores the accountability attached to every financial transaction. While spending to assist our brothers, friends and associates is generally encouraged, a noble intention does not make every means lawful. The permissibility of assistance remains subject to the permissibility of the method through which it is provided. For the reasons advanced above, a pay-to-vote contest bears a strong resemblance to the participant-funded competitions that contemporary juristic authorities have regarded as forms of maysir, particularly where the winner's benefit is wholly or partly financed through compulsory contributions made by supporters. Indeed, Allāh praises: “Those who listen to speech and follow the best of it. Those are the ones whom Allāh has guided, and those are the people of understanding” (Q39:18). Muslims should therefore exercise caution, seek guidance from people of knowledge where necessary, and ensure that their support for others is channelled through means that are consistent with the teachings of the Sharī'ah.

Recommendations

a) Voting rights should be made free and should not be conditioned upon the payment of any fee or financial contribution. Likewise, contestants or supporters should not be required to finance, directly or indirectly, the award or prize to be given to the winner or winners of the contest.
b) Where fundraising, donations, or solicitation of support is necessary, such contributions should be entirely voluntary and should not be tied to the right to vote. In other words, any request for financial support should be clearly separated from the voting process and should neither determine nor influence a person's ability to cast a vote.
c) Where contestants are required to make payments in connection with a contest, such payments should not be used to finance or facilitate the prize awarded to the winner or winners. The purpose, nature, and application of the funds should be clearly disclosed to all participants to ensure transparency and avoid any resemblance to maysir or participant-funded prize structures.
d) Organisers of contests and competitions should adopt funding models that are consistent with Sharī‘ah principles, such as sponsorships, independent donations, or prizes funded by third parties who are not participants in the contest.
e) Muslims should exercise caution before participating in, promoting, or supporting any contest whose structure involves compulsory financial contributions linked to voting rights or the financing of prizes. Assistance to friends, associates, or preferred contestants should be channelled through means that are lawful and compliant with the teachings of the Sharī‘ah.