Do the conditions set by the Mudarib – including the condition of one year passing to obtain profit, and informing him two months in advance if we wish to withdraw the money, otherwise it will be considered an implicit agreement to Mudaraba for the following year – invalidate the Mudaraba contract? And is it permissible for us to follow up with him and hold him accountable for the progress of work and accounts?

The Mudarabah contract is a permissible contract, and either the capital provider or the agent may dissolve it at any time if it is concluded without a specific duration. If it is concluded for a specific duration, scholars differ on the validity of its temporal limitation, holding two opinions:

The first opinion: Its temporal limitation is valid, and the condition must be fulfilled. If the term ends, the contract is renewed. This is the view of the Hanafis and one narration from Ahmad. They argued that if a disposition is limited by type, then it is permissible to limit it by time, similar to agency.

The second opinion: Its temporal limitation is not valid. This is the view of the Shafi'is, Malik, and another narration from Ahmad. They argued that the Mudarabah contract is absolute, so stipulating its termination is not valid, similar to marriage. They also contended that this condition is not required by the contract and causes harm to the agent.

Based on the first opinion, which affirms the validity of temporal limitation, automatic renewal of the contract by agreement is permissible.

It is permissible to monitor the agent and hold him accountable if negligence is evident on his part, and he guarantees what he was negligent in. If no negligence is found, his statement is relied upon unless the capital provider has evidence to the contrary.