Technology can serve as a platform not as a solution in itself.
Possible technological tools: Internet, Social Media, GPS localization, Digital Media
(1) Developed countries (high technology usage): information flows relatively easy. High broadband / internet penetration and access to social media platforms (facebook, twitter). Localization is relatively easy as technology is already developed.
(2) Underdeveloped countries (low technology usage): information flows very hard and is usually suppressed by powerful individuals. Access to social media is there, however low internet usage is a major obstacle.
In both cases, information flows need to be increased and lead to the exposure of the corrupted individuals. We need to start from a macro analysis. Mapping out the cities around the world where there is an already very high complaint rate / information that unlawful detention is present. Scales of colors/ numbers are to be defined representing the penetration of this type of detention.
Moving to a micro level, where the individual courts or institutions are identified based on the same system – high level or increasing level of complaints. The real benefit out of the concept is the identification of the individual in the corrupt process. Singling out the people (names, pictures) responsible for carrying out the ‘dirty work’ will create a stigma around them in the society they occupy (e.g. neighborhood they live in).
A good source of information might be journalists, who do not have the power to put the information in the newspaper but have good intelligence on the people involved in such cases. We give them a platform, where they can localize the city and institution and the actual people.
Having in place the platform, the ‘trigger’ to publish the individuals needs to be developed. This can be based on number of complaints or already available information – single out the ‘Kaddaffi’ in the country!