1. Part I: Background on CSO/NGO
Accountability
1 Issues in CSO/NGO Accountability
The issue of accountability in the civil society sector has gained increasing prominence both at the
national and international levels. For instance, an index developed on the basis of more than 50
country studies has found the issue of civil society organizations (CSOs) legitimacy to be the most
widely raised concern.1 This attention to accountability in the sector is attributable to the increasing
number, enhanced role and … Since the 1970s international development NGOs have exploded in
number and scale of operation owing mainly to the redirection of previously government focused
overseas development assistance.2 Presently, the non profit sector is valued at over $1 trillion a year3
globally, which by itself is sufficient cause for growing attention in the international community.
Moreover, NGOs have increasingly taken a more prominent and visible role across a broad spectrum
of concerns at international, regional and national levels. The takeover of the welfare functions of
the formally accountable State by international NGOs and local non-profit organizations has also
given more urgency to the issue, especially among States.4 NGO accountability to ensure both the
legitimacy and effectiveness of their operations could thus be considered the reverse side of greater
opportunities to exert influence on a wider range of issues. SustainAbility’s seventh survey of the
non-profit sector concludes that while facing major opportunities to increase their influence over the
global agenda, many international NGOs will have to address critical challenges around their
accountability, financing and partnerships.5
1.1 Concept of NGO Accountability
NGO Accountability is a concept that is still being debated and analyzed.6 The Merriam-Webster
dictionary defines accountability as “the quality or state of being accountable; especially: an
obligation or willingness to accept responsibility or to account for one’s actions.” In this general
sense, accountability concerns a relationship between A and B, where A is accountable to B if they
must explain their actions to B, and could be adversely affected by B if B doesn’t like the account.7
For an NGO, accountability refers to “the obligation to report on one’s activities to a set of legitimate
1
The CIVICUS’ Civil Society Index
2
Between 1975 and 1985 official governmental aid to NGOs increased by 1,400% (Fowler, 1991)
3
Marie Chêne, Developing a code of conduct for NGOs, U4 Expert Answers, Transparency International,
27 April 2009
4
Goetz and Jenkins, 2002, p49 “the privatization of service delivery and some other State functions has
confused the public perception of the formally accountable actor: is it the State or the private
provider?”
5
http://www.sustainability.com/downloads_public/insight_reports/21st_ngo.pdf
6
Vicente García-Delgado, NGO Accountability: One size does not fit all, A view from the United Nations,
February 2007
7
Goetz and Jenkins, 2002, p5

2. authorities”8 demonstrating regularly that it uses its resources wisely and doesn’t take advantage of
its special privileges to pursue activities contrary to its status. Transparency, accountability and
legitimacy are closely intertwined notions. An accountable NGO is transparent, readily opening its
accounts and records to public scrutiny by funders, beneficiaries, and others. The legitimacy of the
NGOs is tied to its accountability to its constituency - and the public at large -, the transparency of its
processes, its adherence to its mission and its effectiveness in fulfilling its mandate. Through these
acts of accountability, an NGO expresses its commitment to democratic values and, over the long
term, contributes to the building of civil society.9
1.2 Elements
Even the simplest definitions of accountability are bound to raise some key questions as to the
nature of the relationship represented. For example, the above definition of the term as duty to
report raises the key issue of what are the legitimate authorities and whom NGOs should be
accountable to. A more comprehensive use of the term accountability in the context of the civil
society sector has to answer four core questions the form the basic elements of our concept of
accountability. These are:10
Who is accountable?
To whom?
For what? and
How?
The following sections identify and analyze the major issues and considerations in answering each of
these questions.
1.2.1 Who is Accountable?
The first element of accountability refers to our understanding of the entities that are accountable.
In the context of civil society, this amounts to the meaning and profile of CSOs/NGOs. The following
are some of the broadly accepted definitions of civil society:
Plan International:- Refers generally to groups of people / organisations who aim to work
together for the benefit of individual citizens or society as a whole (not including
government).11
World Bank: - “wide array of non-governmental and non-profit organizations that have a
presence in public life, expressing the interests and values of members or others based on
ethical, cultural, political, scientific, religious or philanthropic considerations” 12
8
Marie Chêne, Developing a code of conduct for NGOs, U4 Expert Answers, Transparency International,
27 April 2009
9
NGO Governance Handbook for CEE
10
Jem Bendell, Debating NGO Accountability, NGLS Development Dossier, United Nations, New York and
Geneva, 2006
11
available at: http://www.plan-international.org/resources/development.html

3. GTZ: - “embracing a social sphere that is independent of the state, includes self-reliant social
networks, acknowledges broad based values of ‘civil participation’ and offers opportunities for
individuals and groups to defend the interests of the disadvantaged in the public sphere”13
The Center for Civil Society (CCS): - “the set of institutions, organizations and behaviour
situated between the State, the business world and the family”.14
Transparency International’s draft plain language guide defines civil society as follows: The
arena, outside of the family, state and market where people associate to advance a common
set of interests. Voluntary and community groups, non-governmental organisations (NGOs),
trade unions and faith-based organisations commonly are included in this sphere.
The first thing that comes to mind here is that the conception of civil society encompasses a wide
profile of structures, institutions, processes and behaviours outside the state and business sectors,
except for the family. Even if one was to focus on structures and institutions, which are collectively
called Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) or Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), vary in terms
of purpose, nature of beneficiaries, size, degree of formality, scope of their activities, constituency,
funding, and other key components of institutional profile. In terms of purpose, the reference
covers, among others, charitable entities, religious institutions, educational institutions (schools,
universities, research institutes, and think tanks), health facilities, professional associations, trade
associations and standards bodies, and labor unions. To complicate matters, there are inherent
overlaps between the civil society and the other sectors. For instance, professional associations,
labor unions, employers’ associations, and consumer groups have dual characteristics straddling the
private and civil society sectors.
More relevant to the issue at hand, the broad range of actors covered by the concept of civil society
are characterized by divergent interests, incentives and challenges as well as operating in different
social, political and legal contexts. Thus, while accountability is an issue common to all of them, the
specifics are bound to vary, making it difficult to address them in the same framework. In the very
least, a civil society accountability framework will have to be very general and supplemented by
more specific frameworks differentiated by narrower shared characteristics.
1.2.2 To whom?
Organizations need to be accountable to many different sets of stakeholders which, separately and
collectively, play an integral part in their operations. Each with distinct relationships based on
different or even divergent interests. This calls for a three-stage process involving: identification of
the organization’s key stakeholders; clarifying the interests, or stakes, of each key stakeholder; and,
prioritization among stakeholders. For CSOs/NGOs, the key stakeholders they need to be
accountable to are:
12
Bizuwerk Ketete: Issues on Civil Society, Discussion Paper Prepared for the Civil Society Internal
Dialogue Organized by the Union of Ethiopian Civil Society Associations, June 2006, p. 10: quoting
Ousman Deme: African Civil Society and APRM: Insights between Hopes and Skepticism, Partnership
Africa Canada.
13
Ibid., p. 11: quoting GTZ Working Document, 2002, p. 54
14
Ibid., quoting Center for Civil Society, London School of Economics: What is Civil Society

4. Internal stakeholders (staff, board, members for associations, member organizations for
coalitions, other CSOs/NGOs, local partners for INGOs)
Donors (institutional donors or supporters providing funding and other resources);
Government regulatory bodies (provide legal and regulatory frameworks);
Beneficiaries provide the basis for an organization's purpose and moral legitimacy.
The profile and stakes of each stakeholder may also merge and overlap. For instance, a government
agency may be an internal stakeholder if represented in the organizational governance or as an
implementing partner, a donor if providing financial or technical support, and an intermediate
beneficiary if targeted by the intervention. Similarly, a donor agency may be an internal stakeholder
as a member of a coalition while beneficiaries in broad membership associations such as labor unions
are also internal stakeholders.
The different nature of the various stakeholders involved makes the issue of NGO accountability very
complex and challenges NGOs to clarify and balance their responsibilities vis-à-vis their different
stakeholders. Effectively balancing the needs of these different stakeholders is the crux of being
accountable.
According to a 2006 UN dossier on NGO accountability, NGOs should be primarily accountable to
those they affect who have less power.15 However, the strength and clarity of accountability
relationships is more likely to be determined by the leverage and power of the stakeholder over an
NGO. Usually, the accountability to institutional donors draws strength from contractual obligations
and the dependence of NGOs on donor funds. Similarly, governments create the legal and regulatory
environment within which NGOs function, so they too have significant leverage to guarantee
accountability. Beneficiaries, on the other hand, despite being the reason why most NGOs exist,
generally lack the power to make demands of them. Thus, unless organizations put in place
institutionalized means for beneficiaries to make their opinions felt, the accountability relationship
with them remains weak.
The implications for the development of additional accountability frameworks are three-fold. First,
existing organizational accountabilities to donors and the government should be taken into account
since NGOs could not significantly alter the relationship. Second, to the extent that the overall
accountability framework could be strengthened, upward accountabilities to these actors should be
addressed. Overlapping interests between upward and downward accountabilities should also be
taken into account since the rationale behind upward accountability is often related to the interests
of beneficiaries. Thirdly, since it is the most critical gap in the status quo, downward accountability to
beneficiaries should be consciously addressed in any comprehensive accountability framework.
1.2.3 For What?
This element of organizational accountability determines the scope of the relationship between
NGOs and the stakeholders they are accountable to. It answers the question ‘what is the basis for
the stake creating the relationship? Or why is it a stakeholder in the organization and its operations?
As such, its nature draws from the identity of the specific stakeholder and its stake in the
15
http://www.gdrc.org/ngo/accountability/NGO_Accountability.pdf

5. organization. In the simplest form an organization may be accountable to donors for utilization of
funds, to governments for its effect on the public interest, and to beneficiaries for the effects of its
activities on their lives.
The task here is to identify each stakeholder, map their respective stakes in the organization and its
operations, and determine what each is owed in terms of accountability. However, since an
organization is accountable simultaneously to each stakeholder for different matters, the multiplicity
of stakeholders and complexity of their stakes makes the identification of this element of
accountability more difficult. The prioritization of stakeholders in determining ‘to whom’ the
organization is accountable to is very important in this respect.
1.2.4 How?
As the debate on NGO accountability has increased, a wide range of initiatives have emerged to
address perceived gaps and concerns in relation to issues such as NGO governance, transparency,
advocacy, finances and tax status, as well as their stakeholder relations. These include externally
imposed mandatory regimes as well as voluntary self-governance initiatives.
Mandatory measures take the form of regulatory rules enacted through legislation that are
implemented and enforced through a government mandated institution. NGOs face a range of
regulations ranging from those that apply to any organization, regarding financial affairs, labour
relations and so forth, to those that are specific to organizations with a special tax status. Other
regulatory tools developed and used within such framework include establishing regulating
instruments such as certification or rating systems, self assessments, independent evaluations,
financial and social audits, disclosure of statements and reports and participation processes.
Aside from regulatory initiatives on NGO accountability, the sector has itself been using a variety of
voluntary mechanisms around the world. Typically, these take the form of codes of conduct,
accreditation and certification bodies, rating systems, and other measures or standards governing
conduct16 or programme or financial information disclosure to which organizations willingly
undertake to abide.
Mandatory and voluntary accountability mechanisms applicable within the civil society sector
interact in a number of ways. Typically, mandatory rules define the minimum organizational and
operational standards while voluntary ones provide for commitments beyond the minimum required.
However, the two may supplement each other in the sense that the latter elaborates upon the
former or seeks to address gaps in the minimum standards.
1.3 Mechanisms of Civil Society Self-Regulation
NGOs are addressing the issue of accountability individually and collectively through self-regulation
mechanisms. A growing number are attempting to develop common norms and standards around to
16
For example, codes of conduct on ethical behaviour have been adopted or drafted by groups in
Eastern Europe (Wyatt, 2003), across Asia (Correa, 2003; Sidel, 2003) and in North America and
Western Europe (Ebrahim, 2003a).

6. whom and for what they are accountable. Although diverse in form and structure, self-regulation
initiatives fall into one of three categories:17
aspirational codes of principles/ethics that signatories strive to achieve;
codes of conduct in which more defined standards are set;
certification schemes where compliance with clear standards is verified by a third party.
Table 1: Types of Voluntary NGO Accountability Mechanisms
Accountability Definition Example
Mechanisms
Elections Election of board members by NGO World Development Movement (WDM),
members Friends of the Earth (FOE)
Board Appointment of independent board World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF)
Appointments members from key stakeholder groups
Monitoring and Assessing performance against a set of A requirement of most bilateral aid agency
Evaluation pre-defined goals for the funded activity funded projects (OECD-DAC)
Standards and Documented statements of how an Human Accountability Project (HAP-I),
Codes of Conduct organization and its staff should operate, People In Aid
adopted by one or a collection of
organizations
Certifications Auditing organizations against, and Société Générale de Surveillance (SGS)
endorsing them as in conformity with, NGO Certification, Philippine Council for
specific standards or codes NGO Certification
Ratings Assessing organizations against a standard Global Accountability Project (GAP),
or code, and rating their performance, Charity Navigator
whether requested or not
Reporting Publishing of performance, sometimes Financial reports are required in most
against using a specific standard, to a countries, and most large NGOs publish
specific organization or the public annual reports on progress, for donors or
members
Dialogue and Involvement of affected persons in ActionAid
Participation decision making on, or implementation of,
specific projects
Source: Jem Bendell, Debating NGO Accountability, NGLS Development Dossier
The most common mechanisms of CSO/NGO self governance is the code of conduct. These may be
applicable within a specific organization, a coalition of collaborating organizations, a sector or
geographical area, nationally, or internationally.
2 Ethiopian Civil Society Context
The next stage in the task at hand is to identify and describe the key issues in NGO accountability in
Ethiopia. To this end, one should first set the sector context in terms of profiling the actors within
17
Robert Lloyd and Lucy de las Casas, NGO self-regulation: enforcing and balancing accountability, One
World Trust

7. the sector and existing accountability frameworks. The following sections provide a brief
background on:
The profile of CSOs/NGOs populating the Ethiopian civil society sector in general and the
membership profile of CCRDA in particular;
The mandatory accountability mechanisms in place in the form of the legal framework for
the regulation of the civil society sector in Ethiopia; and,
Self-regulation initiatives by CSOs/NGOs.
At the end of this part of the assessment, we will have established the context for the development
of the planned NGO code of conduct.
2.1 The Ethiopian Civil Society Sector
The diversity of CSOs in terms of formality, organization and areas of engagement makes a
comprehensive and water-tight classification impossible. The similarities and differences between
various categories is to be seen in terms of the importance of one characterization in the profile
rather than its presence or absence. With this in mind, the current composition of the Ethiopian civil
society sector may be seen in five general categories on the basis of form of organization, primary
purposes and membership. These are community based organizations, NGOs, interest groups, and
mass organizations.
Category Structure Core Objective Membership Remarks
Community Informal, but Issues in local Community members;
Based form formal communities CBOs as unions
Organizations unions
NGOs Formal Charitable or 3rd Limited, if any Membership not a
associations or party benefit defining feature
organizations
Interest Groups Formal Shared interest of a Open to defined social
associations defined group group, e.g. teachers,
workers, employers
Mass Formal Formulating and Open to a large social Development
Organizations associations advancing broad group, e.g. youth, Association is defined
public interests women, by geographical area
Community based organizations (CBOs) are informal self-help groups with local membership
operating at the community level. CBOs generally serve the purpose of creating social and economic
security and stability in communities through the distribution of individual/ household level risk
associated with death, marriage, sickness, and other social occasions. While CBOs are informal
structures, there is a growing trend of formalization at a secondary level as unions of similar CBOs.
NGOs are local, regional and national organizations registered with the Ministry of Justice to engage
in relief and rehabilitation, and development activities. Organizationally, most Ethiopian NGOs are
established as non-profit associations with a general assembly, a board of directors, and a secretariat

8. headed by an Executive Director.18 However, the core objective of these organizations is not to serve
their membership but a broader constituency or public purpose as determined by founding
members.19 Though very few, there are NGOs established without such membership structures.
Interest groups are formal membership organizations whose primary objective is to protect and
promote the rights and interests of a narrowly defined group forming their membership profile, i.e.
members and potential members. While interest groups have similar organizational structures as
non-profit associations, their membership profile covers their constituency. The range of CSOs falling
under this category include professional associations, labour unions, associations of victims and
vulnerable groups, and employers associations.
Mass-based organizations are ‘public membership associations’ characterized by formal membership
organizations with broad membership, actual and potential. Their primary purpose is acting as
forums for participation towards taking collective action and mobilizing support for issues of interest
to a broadly defined social group. Most of these organizations, such as youth associations and
women’s associations, are very similar to interest groups except for their broader constituency.
Others, such as development associations20 are distinct in having objectives defined by
geographically delimited constituency and virtually no limits on membership.
The remaining civil society landscape is inhabited by a range of entities with distinctly different
profiles undertaking charitable or public interest activities including:
the development sections of religious, commercial and other institutions (with or without
parent bodies operating in the country);
foreign and international NGOs, and government sponsored foreign NGOs (usually referred
to as GO-NGOs) implementing projects (as branch offices or locally registered entities);
inter-governmental development cooperation structures (acting as distinct agencies or
departments within a foreign embassy);
formal networks or super associations with a wide range of institutions as members with or
without shared thematic, geographic, or other interest (CRDA, NEWA, UECSO).
Ethiopian CSOs/NGOs have some experience of coalitions in the form of thematic groups and issue-
based networks on pastoralist issues, environment, rural development, gender, HIV/AIDS,
reproductive health and other issues as well as informal event-based networks. The objective of
most of these networks does not go beyond information sharing. Issues of organizational
independence and apathy towards interference in the management of member organizations seem
18
Until recently, the only legislative framework for CSOs was the law governing non-profit associations
which required them to have appropriate bodies and organs (General Assembly, Board of Directors,
and Executive Committee). Hence the statutes and by-laws of most CSOs provide the existence of
these organizational structures.
19
As a requirement of registration, non-profit associations should have five founding members as per
the provisions of the Civil Code relating to associations.
20
Development associations are ethnic and/or locality-based engaged in development issues within the
original settlement areas of the ethnic or linguistic group they are associated with.

9. to have resulted in a limited initiative to act collectively. The following are among the networks
operating at the national level:
Christian Relief and Development Association (CRDA), now CCRDA
The Union of Ethiopian Civil Society Associations (UECSA)
Poverty Action Network Ethiopia (PANE)
Association of Ethiopians Living with HIV/AIDS (ALEWHA)
Civic and Voters Education Association (CVEA)
Basic Education Association-Ethiopia (BEA-E) formerly known as BEN
Sustainable Land Use Forum (SLUF)
Network of Ethiopian Women’s Associations
Ethiopian Inter-Faith Forum for Development Dialogue and Action (EIFDDA)
Association of Ethiopian Microfinance Institutions (AEMFI)
Pastoralists Forum Ethiopia (PFE)
Networking of Organisations Working in Support of Orphans and Vulnerable Children (OVC
Network)
Consortium of Reproductive Health Associations (CORHA)
This profile of civil society actors in Ethiopia is currently in a state of change due mainly to changes in
the regulatory framework.
2.2 The Regulatory Framework
The regulatory framework for CSOs/NGOs in Ethiopia has its basis in the Federal Constitution.
Substantive and procedural laws have recently been developed specifically for the regulation of the
(bulk of) the sector. Moreover, tax laws predating the specific civil society legislation have become
relevant through these laws.
2.2.1 The FDRE Constitution
The FDRE Constitution, which came into force in 1995, recognizes a wide range of ‘participation
rights’ designed to enable meaningful participation in political, social, economic and cultural life. One
among these rights is ‘freedom of association’ under Article 31 of the Constitution. Other important
rights such as freedom of assembly, conscience, information and expression as well as the right to
justice are also given recognition in constitutional provisions.
Article 29 Right to Hold Opinions, Thoughts and Free Expression

10. (1) Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without any interference. (2) Everyone shall
have the right to freedom of expression without interference. This right shall include freedom
to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either
orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any media of his choice.
Article 30 Freedom of Assembly, Public demonstration and the Right to Petition
Everyone shall have the freedom, in association with others, to peaceably assemble without
arms, engage n public demonstration and the right to petition. Appropriate procedure may be
enacted to ensure that public meetings and demonstrations do not disrupt public activities, or
that such meetings and demonstrations do not violate public morals, peace and democratic
rights.
Article 31 Right to Association
Everyone shall have the right to form associations for whatever purpose. Associations formed
in violation of the appropriate laws or associations formed with the objective of overthrowing
the constitutional order or associations carrying out these activities shall be prohibited.
In recognizing ‘freedom of association’ as a right the provision does not define the substance of the
right except for prohibition of associations in violation of appropriate laws, or to illegally subvert the
constitutional order, or to promote such activities.21 This apparent omission is addressed through
Article 13/2 of the same identifying the UDHR and other international human rights instruments
ratified by Ethiopia as standards of interpretation as regards the human rights chapter. Among the
standard setting instruments falling within the meaning of Article 13/2, the ICCPR and ICESCR contain
relevant provisions. The first, under Article 22/1, refers to an individual’s right to associate with others
with a view to promote one’s interests. Article 8/1/a of the ICESCR,22 on the other hand, contains
more detailed stipulations identifying the elements of the freedom as well as reference to protection
from discrimination23.
2.2.2 Charities and Societies Proclamation
The provisions of the 1960 Civil Code and a 1966 Internal Security Act issued by the then Ministry of
Interior were used to govern the establishment and operation of the whole range of ‘civil society
organizations’. On January 6, 2009, the Charities and Societies Proclamation No. 621/2009 of Ethiopia
was enacted.24 The following sections assess the mandatory regulatory framework established by
the CSP in line with the key elements of accountability focusing on:
Who is accountable? The scope of the CSP in terms of which organizations are governed by
its provisions; and,
How? The mandatory accountability mechanisms put in place to regulate the covered
organizations.
21
The existence of specific provisions dealing with freedom of religion and political parties does indicate
exclusion of these forms of organization from the provision.
22
Article 8 (1)(a) of the ICESCR obliges State Parties “to ensure the right of everyone to form trade unions
and join the union of his (her) choice, subject only to the rules of the organization concerned, for the
promotion and protection of his (her) economic interests”.
23
Non-discrimination in the implementation of human rights is a general principle recognized in all three
documents, i.e., UDHR, ICCPR and ICESCR
24
Proclamation to Provide for the Regulation and Registration of Charities and Societies, No. 621/2009
(available at:
http://www.crdaethiopia.org/Documents/Charities%20and%20Socities%20Legislation%20(Final%20Versio
n)-Negarit%20Newspaper.pdf

11. Obviously, the mandatory nature of the legislative framework entails that the type of accountability
is upward accountability to the government for compliance with applicable legal rules. As such, we
will not be discussing the other elements of accountability (To whom? & For what?) in any detail.
The aim here is to describe the mandatory accountability framework as it is relevant to the discussion
of the voluntary one in subsequent sections rather than describing the regulatory framework in its
totality.
2.2.2.1 Scope
The Proclamation defines two categories of formal CSOs in Ethiopia: Charities and Societies. Charities
are institutions established exclusively for charitable purposes and provide public benefit. (Article 14
of CSP) The four types of charities recognized by the current law are charitable endowments,
charitable institutions, charitable trusts, and charitable societies.25 Societies, on the other hand, are
associations or persons organized on a non-profit making and voluntary basis formation of the rights
and interests of their members and to undertake other similar lawful purposes as well as to
coordinate with institutions of similar objectives. (Article 55 of CSP) The CSP singles out one form of
society, “Mass-Based Societies” defined as inclusive of professional associations, women’s
associations, youth associations and other similar Ethiopian societies (Article 2/5 of the CSP) While
the identification of CSOs either as charities and societies is a new approach introduced by the CSP, it
is of no apparent relevance to the applicable regulatory rules.26
Charities and Societies are given one of three legal designations, Ethiopian Charities or Societies,
Ethiopian Resident Charities or Societies or Foreign Charities, based on where the organization was
established, its source of income, composition of membership, and membership residential status.
(Article 2 of CSP) Ethiopian Charities or Societies are institutions formed under the laws of Ethiopia,
whose members are all Ethiopians, generate income from Ethiopia and are wholly controlled by
Ethiopians. These organizations may not use foreign funds to cover more than 10% of their
operational expenses.27 Similar institutions that receive more than 10% of their resources from
foreign sources or whose members include Ethiopian residents are designated Ethiopian Resident
Charities or Societies. Foreign Charities, on the other hand, are those formed under the laws of
foreign countries, or whose membership includes foreigners, or foreigners control the organization,
or the organization receives funds from foreign sources. The major distinction is that only Ethiopian
25
A charitable endowment is an organization through which certain property is perpetually and
irrevocably designated by donation or will or the order of the agency for a purpose that is solely
charitable. (Article 16 of the CSP) A charitable institution is a charity formed by at least three persons
exclusively for charitable purposes. (Article 27 of the CSP) A charitable trust is an organization by
virtue of which specific property is constituted solely for a charitable purpose to be administered by
persons, the trustees, in accordance with the instructions given by the instrument constituting the
charitable trust. (Article 30 of the CSP) A charitable society is a society which is established for
charitable purposes. (Article 46 of the CSP)
26
Only the provisions defining charities and societies and outlining their organizational structure are
differentiated.
27
There is some discrepancy between the Amharic and English versions of this provision of the CSP. The
English version refers to using funds received from foreign sources while the Amharic version refers to
receiving foreign funds. This, however, does not appear to be relevant to the issue at hand.

12. Charities may engage in activities listed under Article 14(j-n) of the Proclamation.28 The provisions of
the Proclamation are applicable to (Article 3 of the CSP):
Charities or Societies that operate in more than one regional state or Societies whose
members are from more than one regional state;
Foreign Charities and Ethiopian Resident Charities and Societies even if they operate only in
one regional state;
Charities or Societies operating in the City Administration of Addis Ababa or Dire-Dawa.
In other words, all forms of charities and societies defined within the CSP, except Ethiopian charities
operating exclusively in one national regional state fall within the purview of its provisions. However,
religious organizations, traditional CBOs and societies governed by other laws are not covered by the
CSP.
2.2.2.2 Mechanisms
The Charities and Societies Agency (CSA) established under the Ministry of Justice is the core
regulatory agency for charities and societies. Its core objectives include ensuring that charities and
societies operate legally in a transparent and accountable manner. Mechanisms used to this end
include mandatory registration, and regular reporting supervision. CSP Article 68 requires all charities
and societies to register, having fulfilled a set of requirements.29 Once operational, charities and
societies are required by law to submit to the agency regular financial and activity reports as well as
disclose their bank account details. (Articles 77-83 of the CSP) The supervisory mandates of the CSA
include (Articles 84 – 94) instituting inquiries, and requiring charities and societies to produce
documents, in writing and orally. In the event of misconduct, the CSA may take a range of measures
including suspension of officers, restrict the organization’s financial dealings, or order the retention
of property. The CSP also provides for more stringent enforcement mechanisms such as suspension
and cancellation of license potentially leading to dissolution of the charity or society as well as
penalty provisions (Article 102).
2.3 National Experience in NGO Self-regulation
The history of self-regulation in the Ethiopian civil society sector is very recent owning to factors
associated with the development of the sector and limited practice of networking. Such efforts are
traced to a series of independent initiatives to examine the role and relationships of NGOs in
Ethiopia. Notable among these are: the work of the Consortium of Ethiopian Voluntary Organisations
(CEVO); a series of workshops by the Inter-African Group (IAG) on the roles of NGOs in the emerging
Ethiopian Civil Society; and, workshops on the principles and laws regulating NGOs by the Christian
Relief and Development Association (CRDA). These forums laid the foundations for the Code of
Conduct for NGOs in Ethiopia by clarifying fundamental issues in NGO accountability such as
legislative regulation of NGOs, volunteerism, and the need for a code of conduct for NGOs.
28
These include the advancement of human and democratic rights, the promotion of equality of nations
and nationalities and peoples and that of gender and religion, the promotion of the rights of disabled
and children’s rights, the promotion of conflict resolution or reconciliation, and the promotion of the
efficiency of the justice and law enforcement services.
29
An additional requirement of securing a letter of recommendation from the Ethiopian Ministry of
Foreign Affairs is stipulated for foreign organizations.

13. Between 1996 and 1998, a series of six workshops were organized by the Inter-Africa Group (IAG) for
Ethiopian NGOs. The foundations of this Code were laid by the workshop organized in January 1997
on self regulation and a code of conduct for NGOs. On March 14, 1997, members of the various
umbrella organisations30 appointed a body called an ‘Ad Hoc NGO Consultation Working Group
constituting of representative from each umbrella organisation and two resource NGOs, IAG and
PACT, to come up with a draft code of conduct for NGOs in Ethiopia using the previous initiatives and
opinions gathered through a series of consultations of the NGO community. CRDA was chosen to
serve as the secretariat of the Group.
The Group examined a number of works in the field and adaptations of other NGO communities in
other countries during its regular meetings. It then framed the first draft of Code of Conduct for
NGOs in Ethiopia, which was scrutinised and further developed at two national consultative
meetings in February and September 1998. The September meeting, attended by well over 200 NGO
people, representing both local and international NGOs, endorsed the final Code of Conduct as an
instrument of self-regulation for the NGO sector.
The Code of Conduct has introduced for the first time standards for previously unregulated activities
and was expected to encourage more effective and efficient ways of working, and improve the
partnership between the NGO sector, the government and the private sector. The Code was also
expected to ultimately contribute to an enabling environment for all sectors and to the sustainable
development of Ethiopia and its people.
30
CRDA, CEVO, Society for Participatory Development in Ethiopia, (SPADE) and Consortium of Family
Planning NGOs in Ethiopia, (COFAP)