Corruption as a societal bane has afflicted homes, families, societies, businesses, governments and nations for ages. Some have traced it to the days of Adam. Under every culture, the phenomenon has been considered detestable although its exact definition has defied definite expression. Its pervasiveness has also been recognised by sociologists for ages. It has appeared in households, offices, churches, marriages and all facets of social endeavours and interactions. When corruption rears its ugly head in the process through which governments acquire goods, works and services for the purpose of running their business, it is highly unacceptable and particularly dangerous to such nations. But why is there the cause to worry about corruption? Why is corruption unacceptable? A theoretical basis is provided to elucidate societal abhorrence to corruption as it affects public procurement in particular using the deontologist-consequentialist dichotomised ethical and moral explanations. It has been concluded that corruption in procurement is awful not only because of its negative consequences but because it is inherently wrong, unethical, immoral and above all an illegality.