Supreme Court Decision of February 22, 1995, 49 Keishu 2-457, 1527 Hanji 3, 877 Hanta 129. The Court concluded over fifteen years of litigation regarding whether payments made to former Prime Minister Kakuei Tanaka by Lockheed Aircraft Corporation through Marubeni, Ltd., Lockheed's representative in Japan, in consideration for Tanaka's efforts to directly and indirectly influence All Japan Airlines to purchase Lockheed's aircraft constituted bribery. Although Tanaka had died following the ruling of the Tokyo High Court's confirmation of the guilt of both Tanaka and the President of Marubeni of the crime of bribery, the Court dismissed the appeal of the President of Marubeni ratifying the lower court's determination that Tanaka's actions had been undertaken in his official capacity as prime minister with respect to a matter which lay within his power to control.

Supreme Court Grand Bench Decision of August 28, 1996, 1577 Hanji 26.  Rejecting the appeal of the Governor of Okinawa, the Court affirmed the decision of the Fukuoka High Court (Fukuoka High Court Decision of March 25, 1996, 1563 Hanji 26) ordering the Governor of Okinawa to facilitate and execute documents associated with the expropriation of property in Okinawa for use by the United States military.  In preparation for the expiration of existing leases related to property used by the United States military in Okinawa, and in view of the fact that the owners of the leased land had refused to renew the leases, the Diet had approved a "Special Measure Relating to the Use of Property by Military Reserve Forces" ("Special Measure") allowing expropriation of land in Okinawa for continued use by the American military.  As local and prefectural authorities had similarly refused to participate in the expropriation process, the National Director of Defense Facilities requested that the Governor of Okinawa undertake expropriation on their behalf.  Upon the Governor’s refusal, the Prime Minister asserted an action against the Governor of Okinawa to enforce a mandate that the Governor perform his official duty with respect to the expropriation.  Affirming the lower court’s grant of mandamus, and refuting the Governor's claims that the expropriation was itself unconstitutional, the Court indicated that the expropriation was authorized based on the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan ("Treaty"), and the Special Measure Concerning the Use of Property by the United States Armed Forces ("Special Measure"), and that since neither the Treaty nor the Special Measure were patently unconstitutional, the expropriation must be treated as being constitutional, and therefore within the official duties of the Governor of Okinawa.