If she hired her son directly, or as part of the team, if he was lobbying her, then it's a problem.
But if her son worked at IBM and she, as Defence Minister hired IBM for some defence contract, then it's irrelevant.
Edit: I should be clear, among the elite, specifically if there are central groups which exist especially within EU nations, and also 'bubbles' in the US i.e. Valley, Hollywood, NY Finance etc. it's very common for 'big contracts' to go to so-and-so, and as a 'favour' the so-and-so takes on 'sufficiently credentialed son/daughter'. For example, if you're the top Defence bureaucrat and you hire 'Bain & Co.' to do a procurement analysis ... well ... you're son with a newly minted MBA might find it much easier to get hired there. While this kind of 'soft nepotism' is arguably problematic, it's also not so bad. It's when the 'wife, niece and grandson of the French President' have 'fully paid positions in the bureaucracy' for which they literally do nothing, or when the PM hires his college buddy's law firm for a $100M boondoggle that it gets worse.
This is not corruption, it's just favours.
Nobody is awarding a major contract to get their kid an associate job at McKinsey.
The contract is awarded to McKinsey, if the person holding the purse has someone looking to get into such a role, then it's a nice thing that McKinsey can do in return.
My mother was a director of customer service and used to hire all of my friends in high school ... because they were my friends. It's normal.
It's technically not very above bar, but it's not necessarily corrupt. Most people get jobs through their networks, this is 'kind of' that.
Relevant article: https://www.wsj.com/articles/in-growing-saudi-business-mckin...
The Saudi government is not giving McKinsey huge contracts because so and so's kid got hired there - point blank.
Also remember these kids are already stinking rich they don't even need to work.
And it's also a part of the world where business is done on the basis of relationships.
When a firm is giving Ferraris as 'kickbacks' then it's corruption but not this.
Hiring less than capable individuals while excluding more capable individuals, for the sake of obtaining contracts, in a region where ministers are changed on a regular basis (hence no guarantees of the connections staying forever) is exactly what I'd call a kickback.
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ursula_von_der_Leyen#Berater-A...
Pushing for something that may be objectively terrible and is agreed by everybody is objectively terrible, may be terrible, but it is still not corrupt.
Words have meanings, and for that to be corrupt it would also require that the person pushing for it was doing so not because they believed it was the right thing to do, but because they were doing it for nefarious reasons such as having been bribed, or only because it would personally enrich themselves.
https://translate.google.com/translate?um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&c...