Appeals Committee. Disputed situations in tournaments.

most people started looking for these "minor" violations and immediately demanded a win in a lost game

That's the point... It turns out that the rules, which were originally created for fair play, serve the exact opposite purpose. On the one hand, the letter of the law is fulfilled. On the other hand, what was the goal? Fair play. And what did we get?...

A good option is to deprive a player of certain advantages in the next game. It's a kind of punishment, but it won't encourage the losing player to nitpick over minor details. After all, the main goal is precisely this: to prevent people from exploiting the rules.

And I also think that making such precedents public is a good option. Something like, "Yes, there will be a rematch, the situation was this and that." scorp is right, no one will want to play with such a person in the future. Maybe not only the "malicious rule-breaker," but also several viewers. Especially if the same people keep picking on their opponents time and time again. Then people might start thinking about whether it's worth trying to win by questionable means if they risk earning a corresponding reputation.