Author: <\/sup>Justin Pwavra Teriwajah*<\/strong><\/p>\n Abstract<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n Inside and outside academic circles, China is often talked about with respect to the presence or absence of rule of law. Some talk of \u201crule by law\u201d and not \u201crule of law\u201d as the most appropriate description of the Chinese situation. To the uninitiated, this may sound like a mere prepositional difference without much significance but to the jurist, this little change of preposition carries a lot of difference in meaning and to some extent, conveys a value-laden concept related to good governance. This paper takes the view that the expression \u201crule of law\u201d is a multi-layered concept with various strands of meanings and that it is rather simplistic to merely hail or denounce a country as adhering to or not adhering to the rule of law without referring with specificity to the exact strand of rule of law which is the frame of such charge against that polity. I make the case that if there is no specificity as to the particular sense in which the expression \u201crule of law\u201d is used, it is rather misleading for any polity to be talked about in terms of that expression as far as law enforcement within its territorial borders is concerned.<\/em><\/p>\n