Viktor was, aligned with the political opinion of his employer simply by the fact that he worked as a government official enforcing, government policies. See Aguilera Cota v. INS, 914 F.2d 1375, 1380 (9th Cir.1990) (“[Petitioner]’s status as a government employee caused the opponents of the government to classify him as a person ‘guilty’ of a political opinion.”). Viktor also has established that his troubles with Hidro arose on account of that actual or imputed political opinion. Our cases make clear that a victim who is targeted for exposing government corruption is persecuted “on account of’ political -opinion. Retaliation for investigating or publicizing corruption by political figures is by its very nature a political act. Reyes-Guerrero v. INS, 192 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>). We have held, for example, that “retaliation
holding that retaliation for opposition to government corruption can constitute persecution on account of a political opinion holding that persecution was on account of political opinion because petitioners prosecutorial investigation into acts of political corruption was by its very nature political holding that forced recruitment does not amount to persecution without a showing that it was on account of petitioners political opinion recognizing that purely personal retribution is of course not persecution on account of political opinion but holding that when the alleged government corruption is inextricably intertwined with governmental operation the exposure and prosecution of such an abuse of public trust is necessarily political holding that opposition to government corruption may constitute political opinion