With those words, you have fallen on something interesting that is not all that clear. Typically, there's a jurisprudential cycle. We're happy to leave the self-defence as it is, yet there are principles that are drawn from Mr. Chen's case. As Mr. Rathgeber said, it's not only the Chen case that these principles are drawn from. In the cycle we draw the principles from the common law and we codify. The codification is an attempt to give more guidance to the court. What we've reformed here are laws that date back to the 1890s.
As a matter of practicality, since you've told us that you trust the judges to interpret properly, isn't this a step in the right direction towards knowing where people stand in this area of the law?