Until you can make a compelling argument I'm going to ignore you, deservedly.
Discussion
Have you ever considered that they believe what they are doing is ultimately for the best? Or even the possibility that corruption is less about malice than it is about incentives?
I believe all individuals attempt to solve problems. However, unethical methods indicate malice.
As I described earlier, malice is about knowingly harming innocent individuals, regardless if the perpetrator believes they are achieving some 'greater good'. Belief in doing good does not eliminate objectively harmful impacts.
Even if the world benefitted from harming some innocent individual X, Y or Z, it would still be unethical and malevolent to harm them or subject them to high risks of harm.
Socrates observed that there are objective properties to health. His use of terms like good or evil were designated to describe and differentiate between beneficial vs harmful. Poison for example is objectively harmful to us. A poorly tested mRNA treatment have a known risk of being harmful since we lack data and have limited understanding of downstream risks.
Example: playing Russian roulette with someone against their consent is malicious. The perpetrator knows that there is a risk of harm involved even if they may attempt to evade the fact that it can be deadly.