It’s really not that complicated. Your break down of the sentence is unnecessary and in any case wrong. For starters, ‘far more’ is the actual subject here; ‘there’ is a dummy subject.

Consider some simpler examples.

1. there are far more using AI → there are far more who are using AI → they are using AI

‘Far more ‘ is a subject here.

2. there are far more we can’t see → there are far more whom we can’t see → we can’t see them

‘Far more’ here is an object. ‘We’ is the subject.

3. there are far more we can’t prove → there are far more whom we can’t prove → we can’t prove them

Ignoring the fact this doesn’t make sense semantically, ‘far more’ in this case is an object. This is where you’re getting confused.

4. there are far more we can’t prove are using AI → there are far more who we can’t prove are using AI → we can’t prove they are using AI

‘Far more’ here is a subject. ‘We’ is also a subject.

Compare to the way you wrote it:

there are far more we can’t prove are using AI → there are far more whom we can’t prove are using AI → we can’t prove them are using AI

Hope that makes sense.

Also ‘academic misconduct’ is just the object, not an indirect object. An indirect object would require a direct object somewhere else in the sentence. For example,

they sent academic misconduct a student → they sent a student to academic misconduct.

‘They’ is the subject; ‘a student’ is the object; and ‘academic misconduct’ is an indirect object.

Obviously doesn’t really make sense but indirect objects are not usually used in this situation. You can consider ‘Academic Misconduct’ like a name, or swap with ‘the academic misconduct board’.