It's debatable if this should be a lumped and mandatory feature of the payment system. For all in-person transactions, payments should be non-refundable and any fraud should be considered a technical weakness. This concurs with the longstanding tradition of paper money, with consumer protection handled off-line by adequate agencies, the courts etc. What currently happens is that credit card users enjoy a separate layer of protection that is subsidized by other consumers - debit and cash users - that pay the same nominal prices. Due to the credit card oligopoly, retailers are forced to do this since rejecting one of the major card issuers means forfeiting a large part of the revenue.
For remote transactions, aside from discontinuing the absurd practice of treating numbers printed on a card as secret authentication data, thereby reducing fraud manifold, we could have a unified system where consumer protection is offered by a 3rd party. For example, before you are allowed to shop online using your central bank account, you must select a private payment processor such as PayPal, Revolut etc., and agree to their terms and fees, and they in turn would handle charge-backs for remote transactions.
For remote transactions, aside from discontinuing the absurd practice of treating numbers printed on a card as secret authentication data, thereby reducing fraud manifold, we could have a unified system where consumer protection is offered by a 3rd party. For example, before you are allowed to shop online using your central bank account, you must select a private payment processor such as PayPal, Revolut etc., and agree to their terms and fees, and they in turn would handle charge-backs for remote transactions.