It's a tough call, as there are many factors to consider. In argument in favor of their death sentence going ahead:

• They knowingly broke the law and knew what the penalties were. This isn't some minor thing like doing graffiti in Singapore and being caned - it was drug trafficking. It's not only their own lives they were risking, but recklessly endangering and potentially ruining the lives of others as well for selfish reasons.

• They were caught in a foreign country, and so the rule of law resides with that country. Imagine a situation that a terrorist (for example) was caught and tried in Australia, and a foreign country has the gall to tell us how we are to punish them, and ask for leniency. If we wouldn't allow that, why should Indonesia listen to Australia?

• Regardless of personal views on the death penalty (personally, I think it's wrong and isn't effective as a deterrent), it exists. There are calls to boycott Indonesia over it - but frankly, countries like the United States have the death penalty too. Should we boycott them also? Or do we just turn a blind eye because Australian's aren't involved?

• While I may not believe the death penalty is effective, advocates for it would argue that it still acts as a deterrent. By allowing mercy in this instance (simply because they are foreigners) sends the wrong message to criminals, and could potentially embolden future criminals.

On the other hand, arguments against their death sentence would be:

• It was a first offence, and singular mistake. Everyone makes them, and it seems disproportionately harsh.

• Other Australian prisoners caught in the same sting - such as Scott Rush - were allowed to have their death sentence commuted to life imprisonment instead. So there is a precedent set for leniency that could be used.

• A large part of the criminal justice system - besides avenging for those wronged - is rehabilitation. You commit the crime, do the time, learn your lesson and become a productive part of society. It can be argued that both prisoners have shown incredible progress on this part, even though it could be cynically said it was in the hope of currying favour for a pardon.

From technically legal perspective, they should get the death penalty - but from a strictly humanitarian perspective, and being against the death penalty, I think they should have their sentence changed to life imprisonment - though back in Australia (especially since it was an AFP operation that got them stung in the first place).