01

Discipline One

Data Protection
& Privacy

Data protection law in the Caribbean is no longer aspirational. It is in force, actively enforced in some jurisdictions, and expanding. The question is not whether your organisation needs to comply — it is whether your compliance programme is built to last, or built to look like it is.

The Caribbean data protection landscape is distinct. Trinidad and Tobago's Data Protection Act, Jamaica's Data Protection Act 2020, Barbados's Data Protection Act (Cap. 308D), the Cayman Islands Data Protection Law, and Bermuda's Personal Information Protection Act each carry their own requirements, definitions, and enforcement expectations. Organisations that apply a single GDPR template across multiple jurisdictions are not compliant — they are exposed.

We bring something rare to this market: direct experience drafting the legislation itself. Our founder was project lead on the passage of T&T's Data Protection Act and contributed to ITU model legislation on data protection and freedom of information across the Caribbean. That history means we do not interpret the law from the outside — we understand the intent behind it.

Our advisory spans the full lifecycle of a data protection programme — from initial gap assessments and compliance architecture through ongoing DPO-as-a-Service retainers, breach response, regulatory engagement, and board reporting. We work with organisations as a genuine extension of their governance structure, not as an external auditor who surfaces problems and moves on.

For organisations building sustainable compliance programmes, we also offer access to Assura — a GRC platform designed specifically for Caribbean organisations. Assura provides structured workflows for data inventories, DPIA management, DSR processing, breach tracking, and vendor management. Ask us about Assura →

JurisdictionsTrinidad & TobagoJamaicaBarbadosCayman IslandsBermudaGDPR-aligned groups

Ready to discuss what a data protection programme built for your organisation actually looks like?

Schedule a Consultation

02

Discipline Two

AI Governance

Artificial intelligence is already inside your organisation. The question facing boards and senior leadership is not whether to govern it — it is whether the governance structures in place are adequate for the decisions being made and the risks being assumed.

The deployment of AI in Caribbean organisations — in financial services, insurance, healthcare, public administration, and HR — has outpaced the governance frameworks meant to oversee it. Decisions that affect whether someone receives credit, insurance, employment, or public services are increasingly made or influenced by algorithmic systems. Those systems carry real accountability implications, and the organisations deploying them carry real liability.

AI governance is not primarily a technology problem. It is a governance and accountability problem. It requires understanding what the system does, what data it uses, what decisions it influences, who is accountable when it fails, and how human oversight is preserved.

We help organisations build AI governance architecture from the ground up — or assess and strengthen what already exists. Our work is grounded in internationally recognised frameworks including the NIST AI Risk Management Framework, ISO 42001, and the OECD AI Principles, applied with an understanding of Caribbean regulatory context.

Frameworks appliedNIST AI RMFISO 42001OECD AI PrinciplesEU AI Act alignmentCaribbean regulatory context

Concerned about how your organisation is governing the AI systems it has already deployed?

Schedule a Consultation

03

Discipline Three

AI, Ethics &
Human Rights

Compliance is the floor, not the ceiling. Organisations that deploy powerful technology at scale have obligations that extend beyond what any regulator currently requires. This discipline is for those who understand that distinction.

The deployment of AI systems in consequential domains — credit decisions, insurance underwriting, employment screening, public service delivery, law enforcement — raises questions that governance checklists do not resolve. Questions about fairness, dignity, power, and who bears the cost when automated systems fail the people they are supposed to serve.

This is not an abstract concern. It is a practical governance and reputational risk for organisations in this region. The Caribbean has a particular history with systems that distribute advantage unequally, and the communities most likely to be affected by poorly governed AI are often those with the least recourse.

Our advisory in this discipline draws on international human rights law, AI ethics scholarship, and direct experience in public sector governance and institutional accountability. It is grounded in practice rather than theory — we advise on concrete decisions, concrete systems, and the concrete governance structures needed to hold them accountable.

Frameworks appliedUN Guiding Principles on Business & Human RightsUNESCO AI Ethics RecommendationOECD AI PrinciplesCaribbean institutional context

Thinking about the ethical and rights-based dimensions of your organisation's technology decisions?

Schedule a Consultation

Work With Us

The organisations that engage us are already asking the right questions.

Our practice is built for organisations that have moved past the compliance checkbox and recognised that data, AI, and accountability are governance questions with real stakes. Let's talk.