> If all of the individuals are acting without malice, how could the institution act with malice? Isn't the institution just the collective will of the individuals?

I think we are on an unproductive tangent, but these are quite important questions. An institution doesn't have its own free will, so I don't think I can claim it can have "intent to cause harm", but it can certainly cause harm.

An institution is not just a collection of people, it is also the business processes and policies. While these are created by people within the institution, they stick around over time. As the world changes around the organization, well intentioned policy can begin to harm.

Individual employees following policy and normal business practice (i.e. just doing their jobs) can behave maliciously without their own intent to do so (sorry, my hands are tied).

An institution needs not only non-malicious members, it needs to constantly re-evaluate its practices. Importantly, when harmful outcomes are observed the institution must re-evaluate and adjust, otherwise the harm will continue.

It's not enough for members to conduct their own behavior without malice, they must also observe outcomes and actively fight against the inertia of existing policy.

That betrays the cooperative principle. Such an institution could not survive.