The purpose of this study is to critically asses the roles and power of government andrnnongovernment actors during the CSOs lawmaking process in Ethiopia. In order to achieve thernstated aim, data is collected from the executive, legislatures, Civil Society Organization TaskrnForces, Civil Society Agency and the academic by using open ended questionnaire andrninterviews. Then, discussion and analysis is made using descriptive and analytical researchrnmethods. Minutes, correspondences and relevant documents are used to substantiate thernresponses from the primary sources.rnBased on analysis and interpretation of the data, the findings of research shows that the CoMs,rnMoJ, experts from the OPM, Legal Affairs Directorate of the MoFA, FDRE HPRs, CSOTFs,rnindividual CSOs, donors and individual citizens participated during the CSO lawmaking process,rnthe absolute power being in the hands of the executive. CSOTFs made changes on several butrnless contentious provisions, those that pitted the government with CSOs are not resolved. Toornfragmented opposition parties remain minority while the ruling party enjoyed absolute majorityrnvote. MoJ was prompted to initiate the law because of following reasons 1) the lack of trust thatrnexisted between the government and CSOs 2) the previous laws (Civil Code 1952 andrnRegulation No.321/1959) have neither clear legal provisions to support genuine NGOs nor tornpunish illegal ones 3) the previous laws do not specifically deal about CSOs 4) the previous lawsrnhave contradicting definitions and 5) the Business Process Reengineering (BPR) reform.rnAll actors shared the need for the law despite differences in key provisions. Key areas of concernrnfocus on: restriction on foreign funding and definition of CSOs, restriction on work areas,rnpowers of the CSA and sector administrators and infringements defined as "Criminal Actsâ€. Thernratification of the law is not the last stage in lawmaking process.rnTherefore, CSOTFs should continue to raise concerns about the proclamation and design arnsystem for reviewing the enforcement and impact of the proclamation with the aim to providernevidence on how its application is affecting their activities. The executive should makerncontinuous reappraisal of the most contentious provisions and provide remedies for each