> 2) There should be a higher price to pay for this kind of fraud.

At the moment, University incentives are to protect the prestige and not for honesty.

There should also be a University list of shame, based on author affil of papers accused of fraud.

The trouble and defense will be that any rando can accuse a paper of fraud, and instead one should use finalized decisions (such as retractions). That would cause delays and not lead to any resolution in many cases, and I doubt that the number of papers false accused of fraud based on any substantial statistical analysis is large.

Karma would help. One could then keep track of people who falsely accused papers of fraud in the past, and correctly pointed out papers which were later retracted, and then weigh the University shame list based on that.