从“沉默权”看公权力在宪法上的“举证责任”

从＂沉默权＂的制度作用可以追踪到现代国家之中公权力所必须承担的宪法意义上的举证责任。以宪法内容的权力—权利两分法角度观察,该种举证责任在既定的宪法秩序之中产生,分为权力分配与设立中的＂肯定式举证＂和公民权利限制中的＂否定式举证＂。在当代国家,这两种举证责任的承担方式主要是通过立法（广义法律）进行,其结论的合法性主要来自于既定的立法程序。进而,公权力在宪法上的举证责任,于宪政秩序的建设中也就承担着合法性之证明的作用。

"Right to Silence" and the Public Authority's "Burden of Proof" In the Constitution

From the ＂Right to Silence＂ we can consider the rote of the public authority＇s burden of proof in the constitutional sense in modern states. Since the Contents consist of two parts-power and rights of Constitution, the kind of burden of proof derives from the established constitutional order, which includes the ＂affirmative proof＂ in the distribution and re-establishment of power, and the ＂no proof＂ in the restrictions on civil rights. In modern countries, the main way bearing the burden of these two is through the legislative （generalized law）, and the legitimacy of its conclusion mainly comes from the established legislative procedures. Furthermore, the public authority＇s burden of proof in the Constitution will bring the building of the constitutional order legitimacy.