The death penalty is not progress in modern society

For years scientists have theorised that it's not intelligence that makes mankind unique, but our conscious ability to learn, and to improve. That's simply the nature of progress.

Today, in a world where significant advancements in science, technology, and industry exist, the role of governments is to protect their own people from harm, not kill them, no matter what side of the globe you are on.

But when some governments around the world are permitted to kill and to use outdated and barbaric forms of punishment like the death penalty, when lives are at stake, it is time to ask ourselves and the societies we live in the difficult questions.

How we answer these questions is the real measure of how much we have progressed.

For instance, we know that narcotics can do great harm to society and that there are laws in place to prevent these harmful effects.

Those that commit crimes must undoubtedly face the legal system and be held accountable. But state-sanctioned killing is not justice - it's calculated punishment, of a violent and cruel nature handed down in the name of justice - and it demeans us all.

Prior knowledge of the consequences doesn't change this.

Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran must have known that the penalty for drug trafficking in Indonesia is death. Now, sitting on death row, they await their final clemency appeals to the Indonesian President, their last chance of avoiding death by a firing squad.

There are those that believe the death penalty is what criminals deserve, and even more so justifiable when unthinkable crimes have been committed.

In recent weeks, nothing speaks more to this belief than the horrific news of Ariel Castro, the man charged with the kidnap and rape of three women imprisoned in his basement for almost a decade. There are reports that Castro may now be facing the death penalty.

As terrible and unimaginable as such crimes might be, it is dangerous to build a criminal justice system based on what is essentially an eye for an eye philosophy. Revenge is not progress.

The reality of a modern-day government killing should not sit comfortably with global citizens, especially when there is no evidence to suggest that the death penalty deters criminals or stops such despicable crimes from happening.

In fact, the only thing we can be sure of is that the kind of punishments we allow our government to administer on our behalf, are just as revealing of ourselves as a society, as they are of the crime.

The risks of taking an innocent life, an irreversible execution, far outweigh the value in punishing a criminal in such a cruel and inhuman manner. And it denies the state the opportunity to genuinely reform those that are guilty of crimes.

Another common assertion is that abolishing the punishment will see crime rates skyrocket.

It sounds logical that a tougher penalty would reduce crime, but evidence from around the world does not show this - in fact, it suggests the opposite.

A 2004 study on violent crime showed that US states with the death penalty had higher murder rates per capita than states without the punishment and that 27 years after abolishing the death penalty the murder rate in Canada had fallen by 44 per cent.

Less than a decade ago, it would have been hard to imagine Singapore taking the first step toward becoming a death penalty free country. Singapore has observed a moratorium on executions while considering amendments to its death penalty laws for some drug-related offenses.

But we have seen setbacks on our own doorstep. The last twelve months have seen Indonesia, Japan, India and Pakistan all carry out executions for the first time in years, in some cases motivated by nothing more than pure politics.

In Japan, in what seemed more populist measure than prevailing justice, executions were resumed after a 20-month break.

In November 2012, Ajmal Kasab, the lone surviving gunman from the 2008 Mumbai attacks, was suddenly hanged - it was the first execution in India since 2004.

In Indonesia in March this year, Adami Wilson was shot by a firing squad - the first execution since 2008, leaving global civil society dismayed and making it all the more urgent for the our government to support the calls for the 130 people on death row in Indonesia, including Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran.

Earlier this year, Amnesty International began campaigning for Li Yan, a Chinese woman on death for killing her husband in self-defense after suffering months of horrific domestic violence at his hands.

We have called on governments like that of Saudi Arabia to stop the execution by beheading of Siti Zainab, Indonesian migrant worker on death row, and mother of two. To date 15,000 Australians have taken action supporting calls for Siti's clemency.

After fifty years of being death penalty free, PNG has just begun debating a resumption of executions in a misguided effort to appear tough on crime. The Australian Government's publicly stated opposition to this move will undoubtedly bolster our nation's credibility as an advocate against the cruelest of punishments.

While the bipartisan public call by Senator Bob Carr and Shadow Minister for Foreign Affair Julie Bishop for the clemency of Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran is a strong start, our past leaves little room for hesitation.

The Australian Government must be consistent in its approach to the death penalty in order to be taken seriously in the region. It must speak out against the death penalty in the region, when it is easy, even more importantly, when it is hard.

The Government must support clemency for all people facing execution, irrespective of their crime or nationality. Helping create a death penalty free Asia Pacific will no doubt increase Australia's credibility in the region and cement its role as a leading player on the world stage.

But our work is not done. Responsibility falls to our shoulders as well. We as global citizens must support our governments to be better as we continue to progress.

And we must stand up and speak out until it is no longer acceptable for governments to take a life on our behalf and call that justice.