A great number of environmental pollution crimes conducted by Taiwanese corporations during the past few years have significantly affected the living quality and health of the Taiwanese people. This research focuses on the ten controversial topics below in the field of environmental criminal law: （1） the clarification between the relationship of criminal sanctions and administrative penalties that are applicable to perpetrators of environmental crimes, （2） the amendment to raise the maximum administrative fine for the purpose of depriving unlawful profits from a environmental crime, （3） the concurrence of an administrative demand to return unlawful profits and criminal confiscation of unlawful profits, （4） lowering the burden of proof in terms of the scope of unlawful profits from environmental crimes, （5） whether the unspent pollution removal cost payable shall be deemed as a portion of unlawful profits from environmental crimes, （6） the recognition of the environmental criminal crime victims and the permissibility of applying the hardship clause in the event of imposing an administrative demand to return unlawful profits, （7） the enactment of a whistle-blower clause for reporting environmental crimes, （8） the expansion of the application scope of criminal confiscation in environmental crimes, （9） proposals regarding the review of and amendment to environmental criminal laws, （10） the creation of negligent environmental crimes. This research reviews the then effective Taiwanese law from both the practical and academic aspects. By referring to foreign statutes and related documentation, this research also points out the issues and loopholes under the then effective legal regime. This research also proposes practical solutions or draft amendments to the law, as a reference for legislators in enacting or amending environmental laws in the future.

environmental criminal law, unlawful profits, criminal confiscation, whistle-blower clause, negligent environmental crimes