Little bit of longish post. It will start with what is seems as irrelevant, but it's importance will come later.
Patronage networks aren't avoidable. And they are key reason why system get's corrupted. What is patronage network? Simple, it is group of people who receive some benefits in change for being political loyal. Good example are public unions. They always support politicians in raising taxes while receiving higher salaries in exchange.
So how large can these patronage networks become? Well, if patron must pay with his own money they can't be large. If patron can use other's people money then they can grow truly gigantic with millions of members. Don't believe me? Democratic party in USA. Send some money towards proper groups using state's budget in exchange for voting. In fact, patronage network is one of primary problem of democracies in states because they are used for buying votes.
What is important is to minimize influence of patronage network in any justice system. Otherwise, "buying justice" will become possible. And best way is to block access to large amount of money.
What are key kingly functions? They are chief priest, chief judge and chief general. Which function will elders take. Practically all three. They will be responsible for religious ceremonies and being judges. If society finds itself in mortal danger to whom they will look? Towards elders. James C. Scotts in his book "The Art of Not Being Governed" claims that only way society can avoid king is by killing anyone who shows such "aspirations". Think a little about above 3 functions. They are most important in any society. As chief judge such person determines what is just, as chief general can force anyone towards his idea of justice and as chief priest claim his idea of justice comes from God. Therefore, any system which allows combining these roles is very dangerous.
While group of elders aren't king, they can function as one by scratching it's other back. Imagine 100 families where each 10 families selects one elder and elder select senior elder. So we have senior elder, 9 elder and 90 regular heads of families. So senior elder orders Baker family to sell bread at lower price. What can the Baker family do? Sue the senior elder? Off course, the senior elder can't be judge in case against himself. But any of other elders will decide in favor of the senior elder (remember, scratching each other back). Besides, people can easily support the senior elder. After all they get cheaper price of bread in exchange for support. Therefore, we now have a patronage network corrupting justice. So how to avoid problem?
Above example shows that inventing new laws is good way to form new patronage network. Now you know why laws are getting more numerous and larger. It's reward for each special interest in patronage network.
What makes answer hard is getting around elites. Pareto, founder of elite theory of political science claims that there will always be elite. It never stops existing, only it's members can be changed. So if members of elite get key kings functions how to stop them colluding? Remember, in any large society they will more common with each other than with regular population. So welcome again corruption of justice and a patronage network to gain supporters.
So good justice system avoid forming patronage networks, elite collusion and stop invention of new rules.
You could think thank Jethro's idea is way forward. First, is it Jethro's idea and not words from Lord. There is no some hidden wisdom hidden in his words or command to follow his system. In fact Jethro's idea will reproduce Baker's family situation. It may take long time, but it will finish there because people favoring corruption will try to infiltratite system. And they have reason for cooperation. What is mechanism for stopping corruption? If most judges are corrupt there is no solution except political revolution. No way corrupt justice system will reform itself.
Second, Moses has specific problem. Israel has received new laws and they aren't familiar with it. But what if population at large is familiar with law as described here (especially Saudi Arabia):
Christians in Roman empire didn't use goverment courts. They functioned on reputation mechanism. Access was voluntary and if you refuse court's decision it would make your reputation very bad.
Who would trust you if you refuse judgement of someone neutral? And since court is public, judge must be truly fair, otherwise his service will stop be used.
In same way more or less have functioned court system in anarchic societies. Remember, in such society there is no monopoly on force.
I have found Twitter thread about court system in today's Saudi Arabia before modernization by Ottomans in 19/20th century. People did receive, often free, religious education which included how court functions and what proper judgement are. This enabled both widespread knowledge what is right and capability that anyone educated can function as judge.
So judge was somebody working as judge part-time and his fees were essentialy something part-time. This provided both financial indepedence of judge making him more fair. Also since many people were educated in court system they could check judges. It was obvious when judge was wrong.
Best system would be something like above.
It is far far harder to be corrupt judge when whole population can judge your work. Second, being judge isn't occupation. This will complicate forming specialists in law making elite collusion far harder. Another key reason for ancient Saudi Arabia's system is corruption cleanse. Even if all existing judges are corrupt, population can select new judges from itself (remember, there is fruitful number of potential judges) and throw old from their jobs. Since most people are trained in law replacement this won't cause judge issues.
So far, ancient Saudi Arabia's system is looking good. Democratization of knowledge helps with stopping patronage network and elite collusion. But there is key problem. So far, all examples of problem have come from elite, from above. But what if people themselves are corrupt?
Now we need to add new criteria: Stop corruption of people.
Here are all criteria: Stop corruption of people, elite collusion, invention of new rules and blocking patronage networks.
It's interesting to consider case of Iceland commonwealth from 930s till 1262. It was stateless society where people could choose one of 300 chieftainces who provided service as police/army. One person could own several chieftainces. There were no taxes, chieftains were paid service as any service now. Second, chieftainces didn't have borders as states now. In fact, in smaller settlements everyone could be using different chieftaince. So, if any chieftain got corrupt or found wanting in any way, he would be replaced by competition. So how did this system fall? Thanks to Christianity.
If a remember correctly, to stop growing conflict between pagans and Christian decision was made to Christianize whole island. What I know for certain is that paying for upkeep of churches has become mandatory. It was first tax in commonwealth's history, before all payments were for performance. It didn't matter how well upkeep of church was done, you had to pay. Now ambitious people have started buying churches and saving money on upkeep. Why? They can start forming patronage network to raise number of followers and keep buying chieftainces.
What were long term consequences? By commonwealth's law, number of chieftainces was limited to 300. With reduction of chieftains, they were under less pressure to compete. Now they could treat their customers less as customers and more as subjects. With each generation there were less chieftains and worse conditions for people with imposing/raising taxes. In several generation old voluntary system has died and new mandatory system was imposed with taxes. And, off course, to keep ruling chieftains now had to create patronage network to keep increasing followers etc.... Final ending was civil war. This would be all be avoided if number of chieftainces wasn't limited because new more honest people would become new chieftains and keep ambitious ones in check stopping growth of their power.
Iceland's commonwealth show why mandatory payments for anything are very very bad. They enable growth of patronage networks and in long term corrupt justice. But their example also provided way forward. If one group can do full secession, they create new justice system. With now two justice system in use, "old" justice system will be forced to reform itself and provide "better product" if want to keep customers. And this is solution for corrupt society. Form new justice system to prove improvement is possible. This will motivate forming additional justice systems forcing all existing systems to get rid of corruption.
Only part missing from discussion is how to stop inventing new rules. So far, best example I know is Old Germanic law where all rules must be old and good and all new rules require unanimity. It's ideas have heavily influenced idea of natural law. In natural law rules can only be discovered, never invented. Since there is limited number of rules this block favoring special interest groups in patronage network.
So final solution must include democratization of law knowledge, right of secession and customary law where law can only be discovered.
en.m.wikipedia.org
