Institutional DPDPA, 2023 — board deck.
One firm. One mandate. One accountable signature. Every DPDPA workstream — discovery, consent architecture, AI governance, vendor contracts, breach response, regulator-facing representation — is signed by the same firm, across six concurrent workstreams: discovery & risk posture, independent technology stack, AI governance, contract & vendor governance, programme management & training, and forensic readiness & regulatory defence.
FAQ
Why a single firm? Wouldn't dual-vendor be safer?
Dual-vendor is the most common point of failure in institutional DPDPA delivery. When enforcement lands, the law firm points at the systems integrator and the integrator points at the law firm — two SOWs, two narratives, no accountable signature. A single firm with both legal and engineering depth removes the seam.
Are we exposed if we're not yet a Significant Data Fiduciary?
Yes. SDF designation triggers additional obligations (mandatory DPO, independent Data Auditor, periodic DPIAs), but the ₹250-crore statutory penalty cap for failure of reasonable security safeguards applies to every Data Fiduciary. Most enforcement risk sits outside the SDF tier, because most data processing does.
How does the engagement run alongside our RBI / SEBI / IRDAI reporting?
One incident — three or four notifications. DRMLAW maintains one source-of-truth incident record and issues coordinated notifications to the Data Protection Board (Section 8(6)), CERT-In, and the relevant sector regulator (RBI cyber-incident report / SEBI CSCRF + LODR Reg 30 / IRDAI cyber-incident report).
What does 'end-to-end' actually mean in practice?
It means DRMLAW signs every step of the programme — from the discovery report on day one to the response brief in a Data Protection Board inquiry, if that day comes. Six workstreams, six signatures, one firm.
Continue to the full page at https://www.drmlaw.in/technolegal/dpdpa/board-deck