本文從犯罪學角度切入，分析恐怖主義相關理論發展，並由微觀與巨觀觀點分析恐怖主義之成因，後就恐怖主義活動與恐怖主義犯罪之差異做一說明。比較分析相關特性後，發現台灣近年三件公眾運輸場所之指標性之爆裂物事件，並非導因於恐怖主義活動，而係屬於恐怖犯罪之性質，進一步分析國內相對應之刑事法令，發現目前法律對於恐怖犯罪型態均有相對應之處罰條文，無須再另行立法規範。惟國際局勢多變，不排除未來臺灣會有恐怖主義活動之存在，故筆者建議可以導入敵人刑法之概念，就現有之反恐怖行動草案做通盤檢討改進，以應付未來之需求。另方面，敵人刑法之訂立，是否會與刑法謙抑思想、罪刑法定主義、程序正當性的刑法觀念相衝突，就恐怖主義發展性來說，謙抑思想與罪刑法定主義尚可透過立法與犯罪學之宣導與大眾教育達成，而程序正義性則是法律適用時，較難解決與認定的問題。

The terrorism theory development was analyzes on the perspective of criminology and the causes of terrorism were described from the micro and macro viewpoint. Finally, the difference of terrorism and terrorist crimes was compared and described in this article. After analyzing these relevant characteristics of three indicative explosive incidents in public transport sites in Taiwan in recent years, these incidents were not due to terrorism activities, but consistent with the nature of terrorist crimes. Due to these terrorist crimes are corresponding provisions of punishment in domestic criminal law, it was unnecessary to make another criminal law at this stage. However, the international situation is highly changeable, it cannot preclude the possibility that the terrorism activities will be exist in Taiwan in future. Therefore, in order to meet future needs we suggested that the concept of enemy criminal law can be leading in to the criminal justice system in our country and a comprehensive review of the draft of Counter-terrorism Act. On the other side, whether the enemy criminal law establishment will be conflict with the concept of modestly restraining spirit, criminal and procedural legality. Base on the development of terrorism, the target of modestly restraining thinking and criminal legality could still be achieved through legislation and criminology education for public, but the procedural legality is the difficult problem to solve and identify.