问题的探讨从两个假设开始: 1.如果任何公民被指控为被告,那么他必须提供充足可信的证据来证明他无罪,否则,他即被推定为有罪; 2.如果任何公民被指控为被告,那么控诉人必须提供充足可信的证据来证明他有罪,否则,他即被推定为无罪。这两个设定从现象上表现为诉讼活动中两种不同的举证责任制度和推定制度,然而,剖开其外表,我们不难透视出两种对立的法律观,冲突的焦点就在于对人权的绝然相反的答案。 The question begins with two hypotheses: 1. If any citizen is accused of being a defendant, he must provide sufficient credible evidence of his innocence or he is presumed guilty; 2. If any citizen is charged As a defendant, the complainant must provide sufficient credible evidence of his guilt or he is presumed innocent. These two settings appear phenomenally as two different systems of burden of proof and presumption in litigation activities. However, it is not hard to see the two opposing legal concepts in perspective. The conflict focuses on the human rights The exact opposite answer.