Skip to main content
Home/DPDP Rules/Rule 9 — Contact Information of Person to Answer Questions About Processing
DPDP Rules, 2025 · Rule 9 of 23

Rule 9: Contact Information of Person to Answer Questions About Processing

Rule 9 is short and easy to overlook, but it's one of the most commonly missed basics: every Data Fiduciary must publish, visibly, who a Data Principal can actually contact about her data.

Effective from 13 May 2027Reviewed September 2026
CommencementEffective from 13 May 2027
DPDP Rules, 2025 · Rule 9 of 23

Quick summary

In plain terms: Every Data Fiduciary must prominently publish, on its website or app, the business contact information of its Data Protection Officer (if it has one) or another person able to answer a Data Principal's questions about how her personal data is processed — and repeat those details in every response to a rights-related communication.

What Rule 9 says

  • Every Data Fiduciary shall prominently publish, on its website or app, the contact information of its Data Protection Officer, if applicable, or of a person able to answer questions about personal-data processing on the Data Fiduciary's behalf.
  • This contact information must also be included in every response to a communication from a Data Principal for the exercise of her rights under the Act.

Breaking it down

Two words carry most of the weight here: “prominently” and “every.”

“Prominently” means findable, not buried. Contact details tucked into paragraph 47 of a privacy policy PDF likely won't meet a “prominent” standard. The expectation is that a Data Principal can find who to contact without hunting.

It's “DPO, or a person” — not every Data Fiduciary needs a formal DPO. Only Significant Data Fiduciaries are required elsewhere in the framework to appoint a Data Protection Officer. Rule 9 doesn't force every business to hire one; it requires publishing contact details for whoever that responsible person is, DPO or not.

“Every response” is a repeated obligation, not a one-time publication. It's not enough to have contact details somewhere on the website once. Every single reply a Data Fiduciary sends to a rights-related request must also include that contact information.

Why this rule matters

This is one of the cheapest rules to comply with and one of the easiest to accidentally miss — a stale “contact us” page that doesn't actually name a responsible person, or a rights-request auto-reply that forgets to include contact details, is a small gap that's very visible to a regulator or a frustrated user.

Real-world example

Example: A SaaS company's website footerA B2B SaaS company adds a clearly labelled “Data Protection Contact” link in its website footer and app settings menu, naming a specific person and email address (not a generic “support@” inbox that also handles billing questions). When a user emails asking what data the company holds about her, the auto-generated acknowledgment reply also repeats that same contact information at the bottom — satisfying both the “prominent publication” and “every response” requirements.

Who needs to care about this rule

  • Every Data Fiduciary, regardless of size — this rule has no size or turnover threshold.
  • Whoever owns the website/app footer and privacy-policy page, and whoever drafts rights-request response templates.

Common questions

Do I need to appoint a formal Data Protection Officer to comply with Rule 9?
No, unless you're separately required to as a Significant Data Fiduciary. Otherwise, you just need to publish contact details for a person able to answer processing-related questions.
Where exactly does this contact information need to appear?
Prominently on the website or app, and repeated in every response to a Data Principal's rights-related communication.
Is a generic support email address enough?
The Rule doesn't prohibit it, but a generic inbox that also fields unrelated queries may not meet the spirit of “a person able to answer questions about processing” as clearly as a named contact would.