If Huckle does not get a probation period, then he is very likely going to die while still in prison. Though it seems unfair, he has committed a heinous act and should be punished according to local law. The death sentence is an extreme and expensive choice, but the cost of keeping him in prison for the rest of his life would be even higher. The general populace would also benefit from knowing that such a dangerous man no longer had access to their children.
I do not believe in the death penalty, even if his crimes are the worst possible crimes. I do not believe that we humans have the right to judge whether or not a fellow human being deserves to live or not. I believe that this man should be sent to the worst prison, but not death.
Seems there are two questions here. First, could Huckle be sentenced to death under Malaysian law. Second, is it morally right for him to be sentenced to death. I haven't a clue about Malaysian law. Regarding the morality of the death penalty; it is something each society struggles with. However, over the history of the last few hundred years, a growing consensus of nations have outlawed the practice. There is something to reformation of damaged souls as opposed to simply cutting them off from life. That said, if the death penalty is to be meted out, sexually abusing a 6-month old, aside from the 70 other counts, seems one of the few crimes worthy of that punishment.
I don't think that any of us are great enough to adopt the responsibility of taking someone else's life. I think that a quick death is too merciful for the kind of low, disgusting person who does this. I'd be perfectly happy for him to go mad of boredom in solitary confinement for the rest of his life, however - or to be abused and mistreated for his whole life by other inmates. That sounds cruel, and it is, but I think that death is too kind a punishment for such a vile creature.