Constitutional Court, which interprets personal freedom very widely in the sense of general 
freedom of action". ? 
Another example is the State Court's practice on the prohibition of arbitrariness, which has 
been declared to be a general, subsidiary catch-all fundamental right, which is not explicitly 
laid down in the Constitution but forms its basis. Here, part of the practice of the State Court 
has detached itself from the Swiss model.!*! 
It is not unusual for judgments of the State Court to refer to a number of foreign supreme or 
constitutional courts. In its judgement StGH 2009/202 for example, the State Court referred 
to practice of the Swiss Federal Administrative Court and the German Federal Constitutional 
Court in assessing the question whether a complaint against a refusal to go into an application 
; 122 
for asylum does or does not have suspensive effect. 
The strong orientation at the practice of these states can be explained not only by the equally 
strong adoption of foreign law but also by the fact that in view of the comparatively small 
number of cases handled, the practice of these courts is of substantial assistance to the State 
Court in its own judgments. '? 
As far as this can be assessed, it has not been possible to find references to decisions of 
constitutional courts from other countries than Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. 
2. If so, does the constitutional court tend to primarily refer to jurisprudence from the 
same language area? 
As is evident from the answer to the previous question, this is the case. 
  
129 Similar also StGH 2011/11, www.gerichtsentscheide.li, cons. 2.1, on the practice of the German Federal 
Constitutional Court on post-mortem protection of privacy, which was not adopted by the State Court. See also 
Bussjáger, Beschwerde, p. 860. 
p Bussjáger, Beschwerde, p. 862. 
122 Bussjáger, Beschwerde, p. 861. 
3 Bussiáger, Beschwerde, p. 861 f.