Well, it's not sufficiently emphatic to constitute a use of section 33 of the Charter of Rights. It's not an override of the charter. Presumptively, “any other law” would include the bill of rights, although, again, I'm not sure if it's sufficiently emphatic there.
My reading of this, my assumption, has been that “any other law” refers to international law. By including foreign law, we know that, for example, the law of the foreign jurisdiction is inapplicable—its rules on privacy, say, but also international law principles that might relate to sovereignty; those presumably would be inapplicable.