JUDGMENT 48 OF 25. 7. 2018 — CASE C-585/16 ALHETO Under Article 75(2) of the ZUB: ‘… In the course of the examination of an application for international protection, all the relevant facts, … concerning the personal situation of the applicant shall be assessed ...’ The dispute in the main proceedings and the questions referred for a preliminary ruling 49 It is apparent from the file lodged before the Court that Ms Alheto, born on 29 November 1972 in Gaza, holds a passport issued by the Palestinian National Authority and is registered with UNRWA. 50 On 15 July 2014, Ms Alheto left the Gaza Strip via underground tunnels linking that territory to Egypt. From that country, she went on to Jordan by boat. 51 On 7 August 2014, the consular service of the Republic of Bulgaria in Jordan issued Ms Alheto with a tourist visa for travel to Bulgaria, valid until 1 September 2014. 52 On 10 August 2014, Ms Alheto entered Bulgaria, having flown from Amman to Varna. On 28 August 2014, the validity of that visa was extended to 17 November 2014. 53 On 11 November 2014, Ms Alheto lodged an application for international protection with the DAB, which she repeated on 25 November 2014. In support of that application, she claimed that to return to the Gaza Strip would expose her to a serious threat to her life since she would risk experiencing torture and persecution there. 54 That threat is linked to the fact that she carries out work in the social sphere informing women of their rights and that that activity is not accepted by Hamas, the organisation which controls the Gaza Strip. 55 Moreover, Ms Alheto claims that, in the light of armed conflict between Hamas and Israel, the situation in the Gaza Strip is one of indiscriminate violence. 56 Between December 2014 and March 2015, the DAB conducted several personal interviews with Ms Alheto. 57 On 12 May 2015, the Deputy Director of the DAB refused the application for international protection lodged by Ms Alheto, on the basis of Article 75 of the ZUB, read in conjunction with Articles 8 and 9 of that law (‘the contested decision’), on the ground that Ms Alheto’s statements lacked credibility. 58 The Deputy Director of the DAB explained, inter alia, that, although doubts concerning respect for fundamental rights in the Gaza Strip were justified, the mere fact that Ms Alheto is a woman who informs other women residing in the Gaza Strip of their rights is not sufficient to find that there is a real risk of persecution within the meaning of Article 8 of the ZUB or of serious harm within the meaning of Article 9 of that law. In that regard, an international report drawn up in 2014 shows that, in the Gaza Strip, policewomen play a role in important work such as the prevention of drug-related crime, criminal prosecutions and monitoring freedom of movement. In those circumstances, it is difficult to believe that Ms Alheto’s activity exposes her to serious and individual threats 59 The Deputy Director of the DAB added that Ms Alheto was not driven to make an application for international protection on account of indiscriminate violence caused by an armed conflict. 12 ECLI:EU:C:2018:584