Strategic Relationship among the Judiciary, the Executive and Legislature

Fukumoto和Masuyama(2006)将分裂总体模型的生存分析应用于所有法官个人资料的数据集，并批评了一篇文章，该论文认为青年法学家联盟的法官在达到师长职位方面姗姗来迟。Fukumoto(2006)坚持立法机关将其权力下放给行政机关，同时考虑到司法机构的最终决定。立法者的异质性导致了授权。Fukumoto(2007)认为，当一个议院不确定另一个议院的意图或法案很重要时，第二议院修改第一议院的法案或将其带到两院会议上。Masuyama(2007)试图揭示理顺行政和议员之间关系的制度机制，并发展更广泛的分析范围，以了解战后日本国会中议会内阁制度是如何运作的。Mchidori发表了两部关于日本双重代表制的学术著作，这是总统制的一个版本。特别是，Soga和Mchidori(2007)通过分析政治和政策变化的大型数据集以及一些县的案例研究，展示了自20世纪60年代以来日本地方政治的动态。根据这本书的调查结果，Mchidori(2008)澄清了双重代表制的含义及其对市政一级决策的影响。Sakamoto(2007)搜索了1962至1987年间每年最高法院司法行政人员出席国会法律委员会的情况，以调查与司法相关的法案或司法行政。通过比较每个内阁的数据，他详细解释了出席频率的一些变化。他还评论了最高法院首席大法官的任命顺序以及每一位首席大法官的任期。

Fukumoto and Masuyama (2006) apply survival analysis with split population model to the dataset of all judges' profile and criticize a paper which argues that judges of the Young Jurist League are late in reaching division chief posting. Fukumoto (2006) maintains that the legislature delegate its power to the executive taking into account final decision making by the judiciary. Heterogeneity of lawmakers causes delegation. Fukumoto (2007) contends that the second chamber amends a bill from the first chamber or takes it to the bicameral conference when one house is not sure of the other house's intention or the bill is important.Masuyama (2007) attempts to shed new light on the institutional mechanism to rationalize the relationship between the executive and the House of Councilors, and develops a broader scope of analysis to understand how the parliamentary cabinet system has worked in the postwar Japanese Diet.Machidori published two academic works on the Japanese dual representation system, a version of the presidential system. In particular, Soga and Machidori (2007) shows the dynamics of Japan's local politics since the 1960s, analyzing the large datasets on political and policy changes and case studies of some prefectures. Based on findings of this book, Machidori (2008) clarifies the meanings of dual representation system and its implications for policymaking at the municipal level.Sakamoto (2007) searched the attendances, yearly from 1962 to 1987, of the judiciary executives of the Supreme Court for the Law Committees in the Diet for the inquiry concerning with a judiciary-related bill or the judicial administration. With comparing the data for each Cabinet, he explains in detail some changes of the frequency of attendances. And he comments on the sequence of the appointments of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and on the duration of each Chief Justice as well.