论权利推定的类型和方法

On the Types and Methods of the Presumption of Rights

权利推定是“剩余事实”存在的必然要求。所谓“剩余事实”,是法律所漏列的事实。作为一套逻辑化的社会秩序之建构体系,法律面对形形色色的社会事实(关系),总试图无所遗漏地规范并调整之。可事实上,再完备的法律,也不可能做到无所遗漏。法律总会因智虑不周或预判困难等原因而漏列一些社会事实。对法治而言,“剩余事实”的存在,不仅意味着法律调整能力和范围的降低,而且意味着法治的逻辑出现了缝隙。面对“剩余事实”的基本处理方式,是根据法律未禁止即自由的原则,推定为法律权利。权利推定就是在“剩余事实”出现时,对法治之法的一种必要的救济措施。那么,对其为何不能推定为义务?因为义务的创设只能由立法主体行使。对它的道德义务推定又何以是种权利?因为一方面,道德义务的推定只能对己不能对他;另一方面,公权主体不能为其他主体推定道德义务。权利推定在社会事实上表现为日常生活中的权利推定和纠纷解决中的权利推定;在逻辑方法上两分为演绎推理的权利推定和归纳推理的权利推定。

Presumption of rights is a necessary requirement of“residual facts”,which have not been regulated by law.As a logical system of social order construction,the law always try to regulate and adjust all kinds of social facts(relations).In fact,however,no matter how complete the law is,it is impossible to cover all aspects of social life.the law always omit some social facts because of ill-considered proposals or unforeseeable elements.To rule of law,“residual facts”not only means the reduction of the ability and scope of legal adjustment,but also means blemish of logic of rule of law.To deal with“residual facts”,the basic way is to assume that they are legal rights according to the principle of“where there is no prohibition by the law,there is freedom”.Presumption of rights is a necessary relief measures to laws in the principle of the law of rule of law.But why not assume them as obligations?Because the creation of obligations can only be from legislators.And why the conclusion is“right”from presumption of moral obligation from them?Because on one hand,presumption of moral obligation can only face up to oneself but not others.On the other hand,subjects of powers cannot get a conclusion of obligation of morals from presumption for other subjects.Presumption of rights as a social fact manifests presumption of rights in daily life and presumption of rights in resolution of dispution.In logic ways,it is dividied into presumption of rights of deductive inference and presumption of rights of inductive inference.