Would a person / team with the qualifications you mention best spend his time on reviewing such work, or should they also be doing some research. My point is,

Would a person / team with the qualifications you mention best spend his time on reviewing such work, or should they also be doing some research. My point is, the only way to get the necessary skillset for reviewing is to actually do research. Hence it is peer-review. Once you are doing scientific research, there generally isn't anyone left who is 'better at it then you' so the best you can do is have it be reviewed by people who are 'roughly as good at it as you'. To ensure the long-term accuracy, we need both attempts at reproduction, and critical reading by people post publication. Both of those should have the option to cause the article to be retracted.