.
.
Subject: formulating strategy / principle, protocol, law
.
.
.
.
.

Always look at what happens when any position(s) created or left
to emerge on their own become occupied by highly skilled criminal
liars. Then what will happen in the proposed strategy / principle,
protocol, law. Adapt strategies / laws until they are best protected
against such occurance.

Make one person boss ? Elect 'a trusted hero' ? But what if corrupt ?
Strategy / law 1: lifelong position.
Strategy / law 2: elections every 10 years.

If it is a lifelong position, much damage will result after corruption.

If it is re-elected every 10 years, damage at some point would become 
apparent, blocking re-election.

Life may be some 60 years.
After emerging of damage it takes at best another 10 years for the
ability to remove. 20 years of damage is less then 60 years, thus
protocol 1 is superior to 2.

Also ask: is it a meaningful, possible, achievable, demandible thing
to ask to be done (the principle, law, strategy) ?

Is it a reasonable thing to ask, an election every 10 years ?
Is it a reasonable thing to ask, a lifelong position ?
Is it a reasonable thing to ask, serving someone in a lifelong position ?
Is it a reasonable thing to ask, serving a 10 year term up to re-election ?

*

I figure that's about it. Anti-corruption strategy/law making, it's not
really that hard. The key imho is to think in simulations, run
simulations in your mind about what might happen, run enough simulations
until you think you've covered enough possibilities. Maybe it can be
done by analytical thought, but that's at least not what I'm doing.

Running this 'game' on strategic proposals may weed out the naive / bad
ones.
-- 
http://www.socialism.nl