I agree fundamentally with what the parliamentary secretary just said, but at the same time,
“can't be too careful”, as the saying goes. Wouldn't it be better to add that even though it seems implied? When you read the exception set out in proposed section 82.7, it is clear that the conflict in question must be legal under the customary international law or conventional international law applicable to the conflict, or to activities undertaken by military forces of a state.
We see that this is already well-defined. However, legislation may contain things that appear to be totally useless but actually reaffirm a principle. Do you really have no reasonable doubt in your mind that this is covered by proposed section 82.7 and requires no amendment?