The present paper distinguishes two formulas of the principle of Right in Kant; it shows that in one of them (the Universal Principle of Right) the principle is expressed as a principium diiudicationis and in the other (the Universal Law of Right) as a principium executionis of what we consider to be right; it scrutinizes difficulties involved in both formulations, in particular the basis for definition of what is considered right and the prescriptive force of the Universal Law of Right; and it proposes a solution based on the consideration that juridical laws are for Kant a sub-class of moral laws and on the concept of a moral authorization (facultas moralis) of doing what is morally permissible or mandatory and of not doing what is morally forbidden.
Concept of Kant’s Right; Moral Laws and Juridical Laws; Moral Authorization; Principle of Right; Prescriptive Force