Rethink the Distinction between Expanding Interpretation and Analogical Interpretation-Advocate a Theory of “no need for strict distinction”

The distinction between expanding interpretation and analogical interpretation is an unresolved problem in the field of Chinese criminal law. There is a controversy over whether there is a strict distinction between them, and if there isn't, how to solve the problem. The controversy arises because the existing standards cannot strictly distinguish between expanding interpretation and analogical interpretation. Actually, the concept of expanding interpretation itself also determines the fact that expanding interpretation and analogical interpretation cannot be strictly differentiated. However, it is unreasonable to prohibit expanding interpretation or allow analogical interpretation. The former limits the protection of legal interest while the latter cannot protect human rights. In fact, if it is recognized that the prohibition of analogical interpretation is just to restrict the absolute power of the judge, there is no need to distinguish between expanding interpretation and analogical interpretation strictly. We do not have to be entangled in the problem of what the possible meaning a term would have(actually it cannot be made clear). What we need to do is just to designate what meaning a term could not have. At this point, the problem of distinshing between expanding interpretation and analogical interpretation has been solved.