Legal aid plays an important role in enforcing and vindicating the rights of citizens within the justice system, especially for the poor and vulnerable section of the society who are barred by their socio-economic status from accessing the justice machinery. In Ethiopia civil legal aid service is provided by the state, the legal profession and non-governmental organizations. Amhara National Regional State Justice Bureau delivers civil legal aid and assistance to the poor and the vulnerable groups of the regional community like women, children, the elderly, the disabled and HIV/AIDS patients. Despite the service the number of self representation in civil proceedings is still increasing. Searching and navigating Ethiopian laws needs skilled and knowledgeable person in law. The unrepresented poor litigants face difficulties and problems in passing through the complex process of litigation which negatively impacts the probability of winning their meritorious cases. The continuation of such trend raises questions as to the accessibility, suitability and quality of state funded civil legal aid service of Justice Bureau. Because of this the study intends into exploring accessible and suitable way of delivering civil legal aid service. The Bureau has duties to provide legal awareness education program to the general public, deliver legal assistance, advice, court representation and alternative dispute resolution mechanisms to the poor. The commencement of provision of legal aid, physical accessibility and high probability of winning for its clients which has a much bigger significance in redressing the rights of the needy can be cited as achievements. Despite the achievements, the provision of the service has faced different multitudes of challenges. Inadequacy of the legal regime on civil legal aid service is one major problem. Absence of law dealing with the types of civil justice areas legal awareness education is provided, on types of legal services legal advice is delivered, lack of clearly set out eligibility requirements such as the means test, pose a challenge since it negatively affects the accessibility of the service. There are also challenges connected with the way the legal aid service is delivered and administered. The unavailability of legal awareness education and information on free legal aid scheme of the Bureau to the general public together with its reluctance to cover some costs of litigation greatly minimizes the accessibility of the legal aid service. Representing the poor and the state are both duties of the Bureau. Where there is a situation of litigation between the poor and the state, the Bureau opts for representing the government. This raises questions as to its independence and focus on free legal aid scheme which results inaccessible and unsuitable legal aid service to the poor.