So your fear is of the majority taking aim at minorities... You think there's no way around that?
There is one way. Dividing civil rights laws from all other potential new laws... Such as how to handle pollution, or economics... Only *these* things then will be allowed to be entered into ballot measure style computer questionnaires. And rights will be kept according to the current ways.
Problem solved.
...
Great idea, but to vague. Let me explain how. There is no strong coherent set of rights, that add up.
Let me give you a practical example for my wife's line of work. She is a social worker and nursing assistant.
You now have a human, which limited cognitive capabilities, which can't make an informed choice. I.e. the person can't control his/her diet and will get severe diabetes, overweight and so on, but he/she really wants the "bad" food.
Here are in the end the 2 "rights" at play. To have a shorter life based on the "bad" habits of the person or to have a longer life based on science in the end.
So how do you ask those questions? Well, it depends on how you value freedom, a good life and so on.
So a dilemma turns up in many places. Here is one for economics in a sense: Should someone by allowed to make computer generated simulations of pedophilia and make money on that?
Further: "... And rights will be kept according to the current ways." If you had studied history, you would know, that there are no current ways of rights. Rights also shift over time. If you want it from history in the western cultural tradition.
Rights belonged to free Greek men, who could serve in the military and who had property.
Today we debate whether animals should have rights. And it goes further. I am in a sense of those experts, because I have studied philosophy. So should trees have rights? I know, but it is not that simple.
I mean it. It is a terrible idea to have a privileged class of people to determine what is right or wrong. Or in your words: To ask the prober and correct questions.