Ara Marceen Naval is an advocate and expert in Public Relations and Governance, with extensive experience in the security sector. Throughout her career, she has championed human rights and promoted increased transparency in defence across various organizations. Her impressive background spans over ten years at Amnesty International, where she held positions including Deputy Director of Arms Control and Human Rights, among others. From 2019 to 2024, she served as Head of Advocacy and Defense Security at Transparency International. Since then, she has worked as a Senior Strategy Advisor at Transparency International Defence & Security. Ms. Marcen Naval is currently a Consultant, leveraging her expertise to contribute to developing research, strategy, and advocacy in Arms Control, Anti-Corruption, and security reform efforts. She is recognized for her leadership in protecting human rights through her work in the UK and beyond.
You have impressive experience at the intersection of security and human rights. How has this sector changed over the last year, and which developments do you think have driven this change?
Tricky, as the context is fast changing. The last year has shown a sharp rise in militarised responses to insecurity, often at the expense of human rights. However, there’s also a growing recognition, especially in multilateral spaces, that sustainable security must be rooted in accountability, inclusion, and civilian oversight. The push for integrating anti-corruption and human rights into peacebuilding and security sector reform agendas is gaining ground. The human security processes at the heart of NATO and the UN, along with increased civil society scrutiny, have also helped re-center human rights in the security conversation, though the geopolitical changes in the last 3 months are quickly morphing the landscape. There’s still a long road ahead.
So, we are seeing two pathways that are evolving in parallel. One is the rapid militarisation and rise in military spending and arms transfers. But also, over the past year, I’ve seen a renewed focus on the human rights implications of defence and security decisions, particularly around arms transfers. The strategic litigation in many countries questioning state decisions to transfer weapons to countries where the weapons can be used for serious human rights violations or war crimes. The Human Rights Council’s increased attention to this issue, including discussions on how exported weapons are used to fuel repression and conflict, reflects a broader shift: Security is no longer seen solely through a military or strategic lens but as intrinsically linked to rights and accountability.
At the same time, civil society is more informed, connected, and capable than ever. Advancements in technology and open-source intelligence mean that abuses are being documented in near real-time, often with detailed evidence tracing how arms are used and who benefits. This has made it harder for states and companies to hide behind plausible deniability.
What’s changing is not only the availability of information but the expectation that it must lead to action. There’s a growing demand for transparency, for end-use monitoring, and for rights-based export controls. It’s an encouraging evolution, even as the challenges remain.
You’ve spent your career tackling both urgent crises and deep-rooted systemic issues in defense and human rights. In your current role as a consultant, how do you balance responding to immediate security challenges with driving long-term systemic change in policy?
It’s a constant balancing act. I try to ensure that crisis responses, whether supporting transitional justice efforts or addressing rapid militarization, are tied to longer-term strategies, like closing regulatory gaps or investing in good governance. That means embedding accountability and civic space safeguards from the start, even in fast-moving contexts. As a consultant, I have the privilege of stepping back, identifying
the systemic levers of change, and helping actors align short-term action with structural transformation. I always ask: How does this intervention lay the groundwork for something more sustainable? If your solutions are not long-lasting, you are applying tactical solutions and not strategic ones, and that might work for the short term, but you are not providing a good service.
Having spent years witnessing the impact of conflict firsthand, you’ve seen both the worst and the best of humanity. With conflicts becoming more frequent and intense, it can be easy to feel discouraged. What sustains your hope and determination?
What sustains me is the resilience of communities. The courage of activists and communities on the front lines reaffirms my commitment. I also find hope in the growing networks of advocates, particularly young people, who refuse to accept corruption or impunity as inevitable. Change doesn’t come overnight, but each policy shift, each accountability mechanism, and each empowered voice is a piece of the puzzle.
Can you share a defining moment or experience that inspired you to pursue a career in security, human rights, and responsible defense governance?
It wasn’t one single moment but more a series of experiences and influences that gradually shaped my path. I’ve always had a strong sense of social justice. Growing up in Spain, I was surrounded by stories of the Franco dictatorship, of repression, torture, and how fear and compliance were deep into daily life, but also of activism, resistance, and the complex role of security forces in a transitioning democracy. Those conversations stayed with me.
Later, as a student, I had an internship at the Council of Europe just as early debates were unfolding about how to address terrorism within a rule of law/ human rights framework. It was a moment when Europe was grappling with how to uphold human rights without defaulting to force and securitisation, and it sparked something in me. I still remember those discussions.
So, I suppose it was a bit of everything: personal history, political context, and professional exposure. But at the heart of it, what’s always driven me is a belief that security should never come at the expense of dignity and that governance, transparency, and human rights must be foundational, not optional.
What advice would you give to emerging advocates aiming to address corruption and human rights abuses in defense and security sectors?
Start by listening. Understand the local context deeply, build coalitions, and don’t underestimate the power of seemingly small wins. Be bold in your advocacy but strategic in your approach. These sectors resist change for a reason, but change is possible with persistence, partnerships, and clarity of purpose. And always remember: transparency and accountability are not technical fixes; they are fundamentally about power and justice.
This week’s Friday’s Five was conducted by The Governance Post’s Danielle Gottlieb.