A year after the waste contractor for the Formosa Plastics Group (台塑關係企業) was found to have dumped thousands of tonnes of mercury-tainted waste in Cambodia, Taiwan is still struggling with its global environmental reputation.
In the aftermath of the accusations made against the company, which include several deaths attributed to the disposal of 3,000 tonnes of waste, harsh criticism has been aimed at the environmental policies of Taiwan, labeled the "Island of Poison" by environmentalists.
"It's been almost a year since the scandal broke, but we haven't seen any kind of redemptive action on the part of either the company or the government," said Joyce Fu (
Wandering waste
Under international pressure last December, Formosa Plastics was forced to move the Cambodian waste -- identified on customs documents as cement cakes -- and several tonnes of contaminated soil back to Taiwan after protesters prevented it from being shipped to the US.
Over the disapproval of Taiwan's Environmental Protection Administration (EPA), 4,600 tonnes of the refuse was put in temporary storage in Kaohsiung Harbor in April on the condition that it be shipped out of the country again.
Seven months later, it's still there. Efforts to send the waste to France and the US have failed, mostly as the result of pressure from foreign environmentalists.
In July, export to Seattle, Washington, was blocked by activists from the Basel Action Network (BAN) and the Tacoma Longshoremen's Union. In November, Formosa Plastics was turned down by the French government, which relented to pressure by the Centre National D'information Independante sur les Dechets (CNIID).
The idea of seeking legal redress is an intimidating one for residents of Sihanoukville who claim to be suffering from poor health after being exposed to waste dumped there by the Formosa Plastics Group. Undoubtedly, the biggest obstacle to their pursuing legal action has been conflicting and inconclusive medical evidence of possible long-term health defects caused by the waste.
But there is hope. George Cooper, a legal consultant with Legal Aid in Cambodia (LAC), a non-governmental organization, says action is being taken to bring researchers from an unnamed US university to Sihanoukville to perform sophisticated testing on residents exposed to the waste.
"There's real serious culpability somewhere [for the toxic waste's importation]," Cooper said of LAC's continuing interest in the case. "But exactly where we don't yet know."
If the proposed testing does indicate the existence of long-term illness from waste exposure, Cooper says LAC believes it will be possible to launch a civil compensation claim in a Taiwan court against the Formosa Plastics Group.
"We've checked with Taiwan to see whether we could sue on [proof of illness due to exposure], and the answer is yes," Cooper told the Taipei Times. "But we still don't know if there's a case ... it depends on how far down the causation chain [in terms of death and damage caused by the dumping] Taiwan law allows us to go."
High Court Judge Tsai Jeong-duen (蔗??幸?breve>[), confirmed Cooper's contention, saying a civil lawsuit would stand in Taiwan -- as long as the affected Sihanoukville residents are able to prove their illnesses were actually caused by exposure to the waste dumped by the Formosa Plastics Group. But the sticking point comes in convincing the Taiwan court of the strength of the "causation chain" by providing firm evidence that associates the illnesses with being exposed to the waste. The onus of providing this proof lies without doubt on the residents, he said.
Tsai also said that in the case of a wrongful act in which the injured party is entitled to compensation, civil litigation can be based on the laws in the country where the incident occurred.
However, to instigate a suit here, the alleged wrongdoing must also be considered unlawful in Taiwan. This would include personal injury and general property damage.
Tsai said that regardless of what Cambodian law stipulates, the compensation sought against Formosa Plastics must fall within the scope of what is allowed by Taiwan law.
"It's not only about proof of damages. The most difficult part is that the victims have to prove the damage was caused by the waste. This is the most crucial factor if they have any hope of winning the case," Tsai said.
-- Phelim Kyne, Chea Sotheacheath and Irene Lin
In its most recent bid to rid Taiwan of the waste -- this time to Germany -- the company has run into opposition from no less than Greenpeace.
Local reaction
It hasn't gone much better for Formosa Plastics at home. The company tried earlier this year to solve the Cambodian problem by importing the waste to its own facilities at Mailiao (
Local environmentalists like Yang Ping-yu (
Other environmentalists said that a similar situation exists at another site in Chihshanyen (赤?s巖), Kaohsinug County, where at least 4,800 tonnes of mercury-contaminated waste dumped by FPG contractors had to be dug out.
Where has all the toxic waste gone?
The problems experienced by Formosa Plastics have illuminated a larger industrial waste problem facing the Taiwanese government, which has begun to examine the dumping practices of other companies.
RSS