what is an article 27

What is Article 27 of the GDPR?

Need world class privacy tools.

Article 27 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is an important provision that conveys specific requirements for organizations handling personal data. Understanding this article is vital for organizations to ensure compliance with GDPR regulations. In this article, we will delve into the intricacies of Article 27, exploring its requirements, the responsibilities it imposes on data controllers, and its significance in the realm of data protection.

What Does Article 27 of the GDPR Require?

Article 27 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is a crucial provision that aims to  protect the privacy rights of individuals residing in the European Union  (EU). It mandates that non-EU based organizations, which process personal data of individuals residing in the EU, must designate a representative within the EU.

This representative serves as a vital point of contact for both data subjects and supervisory authorities in the EU. They act as a bridge between the non-EU organization and the EU individuals, ensuring effective communication and compliance with the GDPR’s data protection requirements.

When an organization falls under the scope of Article 27, it must appoint a representative located in one of the EU member states where the data subjects are located. This requirement ensures that the representative is easily accessible and can promptly address any concerns or inquiries related to data protection matters.

The presence of a representative within the EU is crucial for the enforcement of data subjects’ privacy rights. It enables EU individuals to exercise their rights under the GDPR, such as the right to access their personal data, the right to rectify inaccuracies, the right to erasure, and the right to object to processing.

Furthermore, the representative acts as a liaison between the non-EU organization and the supervisory authorities in the EU. They assist in facilitating cooperation and communication with these authorities, ensuring that the organization remains compliant with the GDPR’s regulatory framework.

By designating a representative,  non-EU organizations demonstrate their commitment to respecting the privacy rights  of EU individuals. This requirement not only strengthens data protection measures but also fosters trust between organizations and their customers or users in the EU.

It is important to note that the representative appointed under Article 27 does not replace the organization’s obligations and responsibilities as a data controller or processor. The  organization remains accountable for ensuring compliance with the GDPR’s principles and requirements .

In conclusion, Article 27 of the GDPR plays a vital role in safeguarding the privacy rights of EU individuals. By mandating the appointment of a representative within the EU, the GDPR ensures effective communication, accessibility, and enforcement of data protection measures. This provision serves as a cornerstone in building a privacy-centric environment and fostering trust in the digital age.

Understanding Article 27 of the GDPR

Article 27 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) serves as a crucial mechanism to bridge the geographical gap between organizations operating outside the European Union (EU) and the individuals whose data they process in the region. It aims to enhance the protection of personal data of EU residents by creating a local presence responsible for ensuring compliance with the GDPR.

When organizations designate an Article 27 representative, they can ensure that they have a dedicated professional who can effectively liaise with supervisory authorities and data subjects on their behalf. This representative acts as a point of contact and serves as a vital link between the organization and the EU data protection authorities.

The Article 27 representative should possess sufficient knowledge of data protection laws and practices to fulfill their obligations diligently. They play a crucial role in ensuring that the organization understands and complies with the GDPR requirements, thereby safeguarding the rights and privacy of EU residents.

Furthermore, the representative can assist organizations in meeting their compliance obligations. They can provide valuable guidance and support in responding to data subject requests, such as access, rectification, erasure, or restriction of personal data. By having a local representative, organizations can ensure that these requests are handled promptly and in accordance with the GDPR.

In addition, the  Article 27 representative plays a crucial role in maintaining records of processing activities . They work closely with the organization to ensure that comprehensive and up-to-date records are kept, documenting all data processing activities carried out on behalf of the organization. These records are essential for demonstrating compliance with the GDPR and facilitating effective cooperation with supervisory authorities during investigations or audits.

Moreover, the representative can assist organizations in understanding and navigating the complex landscape of EU data protection laws. They stay updated with the latest developments and changes in the GDPR and other relevant regulations, ensuring that the organization remains compliant and avoids any potential penalties or legal consequences.

Overall, Article 27 of the GDPR plays a crucial role in protecting the personal data of EU residents and ensuring that organizations operating outside the EU are accountable for their data processing activities. By designating an Article 27 representative, organizations can benefit from their expertise and guidance, enabling them to navigate the regulatory landscape effectively and build trust with their EU customers.

Responsibilities of Data Controllers Under Article 27 of the GDPR

Data controllers have specific responsibilities under Article 27 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). These responsibilities are designed to ensure that data controllers are accountable for the personal data they process and that individuals’ rights are protected.

First and foremost, data controllers must appoint their representative in the European Union (EU). This representative acts as a point of contact for supervisory authorities and data subjects. It is essential for data controllers to clearly identify their representative in their privacy policies and make this information known to the relevant parties.

However, appointing a representative is not the only obligation data controllers have under Article 27. They must also provide their representative with access to all necessary information and cooperate with them to ensure compliance with the GDPR. This cooperation includes sharing information regarding the processing activities, infrastructure, and any other relevant details that enable the representative to act effectively on behalf of the data controller.

Moreover, data controllers are responsible for ensuring that their representative is adequately qualified and possesses the necessary expertise to fulfill their obligations under the GDPR. This means that data controllers should carefully select a representative who has a deep understanding of data protection laws and regulations, as well as the ability to effectively communicate with supervisory authorities and data subjects.

Regular communication and collaboration between data controllers and their representatives are crucial to maintaining a transparent and compliant approach to data protection. This includes providing updates on any changes to processing activities, seeking advice on data protection impact assessments, and addressing any concerns or inquiries raised by the representative.

By fulfilling their responsibilities under Article 27, data controllers demonstrate their commitment to protecting individuals’ personal data and complying with the GDPR. This not only helps to build trust with data subjects but also ensures that data protection standards are upheld across borders.

The Significance of Article 27 of the GDPR

Article 27 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) holds immense significance in the realm of data protection and privacy. It plays a crucial role in ensuring the enforcement and effectiveness of the GDPR by establishing certain obligations for non-European Union (EU) organizations that process personal data of EU residents.

One of the key aspects of Article 27 is that it mandates non-EU organizations to have a direct presence within the EU. This requirement serves as a mechanism to facilitate the enforcement of the GDPR. By having a representative located in the EU, supervisory authorities gain easy access to the organization’s point of contact. This accessibility enables swift communication and resolution of any data protection concerns that may arise.

Furthermore, Article 27 enhances the privacy rights of individuals by providing them with a local contact point for exercising their rights under the GDPR. This provision ensures that EU residents have a convenient and accessible avenue to assert their data protection rights. Whether it is the right to access their personal data, the right to rectify inaccuracies, or the right to erasure, having a local representative makes it easier for individuals to navigate the complexities of the GDPR and exercise greater control over their personal information.

By fostering trust in the regulatory framework, Article 27 empowers individuals to assert their privacy rights confidently. Knowing that there is a designated representative available within the EU to address their concerns, individuals are more likely to engage with organizations that prioritize data protection. This increased trust not only benefits individuals but also helps organizations build stronger relationships with their EU customers.

Compliance with Article 27 is not just a legal obligation but also a strategic move for organizations. By designating a representative and ensuring compliance with the GDPR, organizations can demonstrate their commitment to data protection. This proactive engagement with the regulatory framework not only helps mitigate the risks associated with non-compliance but also showcases an organization’s dedication to safeguarding personal data.

In conclusion, Article 27 of the GDPR holds immense significance in the realm of data protection and privacy. It ensures the enforcement of the GDPR by requiring non-EU organizations to have a direct presence within the EU. This provision enhances the privacy rights of individuals, fosters trust in the regulatory framework, and enables organizations to demonstrate their commitment to data protection. Compliance with Article 27 is not just a legal requirement but also a strategic step towards building trust and maintaining a strong relationship with EU customers.

PrivacyEngine offers Article 27 Representation

To simplify compliance with Article 27 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), organizations can rely on services like PrivacyEngine to act as their representative. PrivacyEngine offers comprehensive Article 27 representation, ensuring organizations meet their obligations effectively and efficiently.

PrivacyEngine’s team of experts possesses in-depth knowledge of the GDPR and data protection best practices. They act as a bridge between organizations and the European Union (EU), handling communication with supervisory authorities and facilitating smooth compliance.

When organizations choose PrivacyEngine’s Article 27 representation, they gain access to a range of benefits. Firstly, PrivacyEngine assists in the appointment of a representative within the EU, ensuring the selection of a qualified and experienced individual or organization. This representative serves as a point of contact for both data subjects and supervisory authorities, streamlining communication and ensuring compliance with GDPR regulations.

In addition, PrivacyEngine provides ongoing support and guidance to organizations throughout their compliance journey. They help organizations understand the specific requirements of Article 27 and assist in the development and implementation of necessary policies and procedures. PrivacyEngine also conducts regular audits and assessments to ensure continued compliance and identifies any areas that require improvement.

Furthermore, PrivacyEngine stays up-to-date with the latest developments in data protection and GDPR regulations. They monitor changes in legislation and provide timely updates to their clients, ensuring that organizations remain informed and prepared for any changes that may impact their compliance obligations.

By choosing PrivacyEngine’s Article 27 representation, organizations can streamline their data protection efforts, confidently navigate the GDPR landscape, and focus on their core business activities while ensuring their compliance obligations are met. PrivacyEngine’s expertise and comprehensive services provide organizations with peace of mind, knowing that their data protection responsibilities are in capable hands.

In conclusion, Article 27 of the GDPR is a crucial provision that establishes the requirement for organizations outside the EU to designate a representative within the EU. This representative acts as a point of contact for both data subjects and supervisory authorities, ensuring compliance with GDPR regulations. By understanding and fulfilling the requirements of Article 27, organizations can demonstrate their commitment to data protection and foster trust with their EU customers.

Check out these PrivacyEngine posts that are related to GDPR

Ensuring CCPA Compliance: What Businesses Need to Know To Be Compliant

The Complete Guide to Operationalizing GDPR Compliance

Data Protection Consultancy Services in Europe: What You Need to Know

Try PrivacyEngine For Free

Learn the platform in less than an hour Become a power user in less than a day

Writen by Zlatko Delev

Posted on: December 12, 2023

Revising GDPR Article 27: An In-Depth Analysis

Table of Contents

As we navigate towards the end of the year, we find ourselves retracing the contours of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). As the world constantly metamorphoses digitally, GDPR resonates more than ever.

What is GDPR?

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is a comprehensive data protection law that was implemented by the European Union (EU) in May 2018. It was designed to protect the privacy and personal data of EU citizens and to harmonize data protection laws across the EU member states. The GDPR applies to any organization that processes the personal data of EU citizens, regardless of where the organization is located. It has far-reaching implications for businesses around the world and has fundamentally changed the way data is handled and protected.

Understanding the Role of an Article 27 Representative

One of the key provisions of the GDPR is Article 27 , which requires organizations that are not established in the EU but process the personal data of EU citizens to appoint an Article 27 Representative. The Article 27 Representative acts as a point of contact between the organization and data protection authorities in the EU member states where the organization operates. They are responsible for ensuring compliance with the GDPR and for handling any queries or concerns related to data protection.

The Article 27 Representative must be established in one of the EU member states where the organization operates. They serve as local representatives and are authorized to receive communications from data protection authorities on behalf of the organization. They also play a crucial role in facilitating cooperation and communication between the organization and the relevant data protection authorities.

The Importance of GDPR Compliance

GDPR compliance is of utmost importance for organizations that process the personal data of EU citizens. The GDPR has introduced a number of rights and obligations for individuals and organizations, aimed at safeguarding personal data and ensuring transparency and accountability in data processing activities.

By complying with the GDPR, organizations demonstrate their commitment to protecting the privacy and rights of individuals. This not only helps build trust with customers and stakeholders but also reduces the risk of costly fines and reputational damage. GDPR compliance also enables organizations to streamline their data management processes, enhance data security measures, and improve overall data governance practices.

Navigating GDPR Regulations

Navigating the complex landscape of GDPR regulations can be challenging for organizations. The GDPR sets out a wide range of requirements and obligations that organizations must adhere to, including principles of lawfulness, fairness, and transparency in data processing, obtaining valid consent for data collection, implementing appropriate security measures, and ensuring the rights of data subjects.

To navigate these regulations effectively, organizations need to have a comprehensive understanding of the GDPR and its implications for their specific industry and operations. It is important to conduct a thorough data protection impact assessment, identify any gaps in compliance, and implement appropriate measures to address these gaps. This may involve revising privacy policies, implementing data protection policies and procedures, and providing adequate training to employees on data protection principles and practices.

Benefits of Hiring an Article 27 Representative

Hiring an Article 27 Representative can offer numerous benefits for organizations that process the personal data of EU citizens. First and foremost, it ensures compliance with the GDPR’s requirement of appointing a local representative. This helps organizations avoid potential fines and penalties for non-compliance.

An Article 27 Representative also brings a wealth of knowledge and expertise in data protection laws and regulations. They can provide valuable guidance and advice on GDPR compliance, helping organizations navigate the complexities of the regulation and ensure that their data processing activities are in line with the requirements.

Furthermore, having an Article 27 Representative demonstrates an organization’s commitment to protecting the privacy and rights of individuals. It enhances the organization’s reputation and can give customers and stakeholders confidence in their data handling practices. It also facilitates communication and cooperation with data protection authorities, ensuring a smooth and effective process for addressing any data protection issues or concerns.

How to Choose the Right Article 27 Representative for Your Business

Choosing the right Article 27 Representative is a crucial decision for organizations that need to comply with the GDPR. There are several factors to consider when selecting an Article 27 Representative that best suits your business needs.

Firstly, ensure that the Article 27 Representative has a strong understanding of the GDPR and its implications for your specific industry and operations. They should have in-depth knowledge of data protection laws and regulations and be able to provide expert advice on compliance.

Secondly, consider the experience and reputation of the Article 27 Representative. Look for a representative with a proven track record in data protection and a good understanding of your industry. It is also important to consider their availability and responsiveness, as they will be the primary point of contact for data protection authorities. Finally, consider the cost of hiring an Article 27 Representative. While cost should not be the sole determining factor, it is important to find a representative that offers a good balance between cost and value. Consider obtaining quotes from multiple representatives and compare their services and fees before making a decision.

Common Misconceptions About GDPR Compliance

There are several common misconceptions about GDPR compliance that can lead to confusion and misunderstanding. One of the most common misconceptions is that the GDPR only applies to organizations based in the EU. In reality, the GDPR applies to any organization that processes the personal data of EU citizens, regardless of where the organization is located. This means that organizations outside the EU must also comply with the GDPR if they process the personal data of EU citizens.

Another common misconception is that GDPR compliance is a one-time effort. In fact, GDPR compliance is an ongoing process that requires continuous monitoring and updating of data protection practices. Organizations need to regularly review and update their privacy policies, data protection procedures, and security measures to ensure compliance with the GDPR.

The Consequences of Non-compliance with GDPR

Non-compliance with the GDPR can have serious consequences for organizations. The GDPR empowers data protection authorities to impose fines and penalties for non-compliance , which can be substantial. The maximum fine for non-compliance is up to €20 million or 4% of the organization’s annual global turnover, whichever is higher.

In addition to financial penalties, non-compliance can also result in reputational damage and loss of customer trust. Organizations that fail to comply with the GDPR may face negative publicity and damage to their brand image. This can have long-term consequences for the organization’s success and profitability.

GDPR Compliance in the UK vs. EU

Following Brexit, the UK has implemented its own data protection law called the UK GDPR. The UK GDPR is largely based on the EU GDPR and aligns with its principles and requirements. Organizations that operate within the UK must comply with the UK GDPR if they process the personal data of UK citizens. However, organizations that process the personal data of EU citizens will still need to comply with the EU GDPR.

While there are some differences between the UK GDPR and the EU GDPR, the overall principles and requirements are similar. Organizations that operate in both the UK and the EU will need to ensure compliance with both sets of regulations to avoid penalties and maintain the trust of their customers and stakeholders.

Complying with the GDPR and appointing an Article 27 Representative is essential for organizations that process the personal data of EU citizens. The GDPR provides a comprehensive framework for data protection and privacy, and organizations must navigate its complex regulations to ensure compliance. Hiring an Article 27 Representative can help organizations meet their obligations under the GDPR and demonstrate their commitment to protecting personal data.

When choosing an Article 27 Representative, organizations should consider their expertise, experience, and cost. It is important to understand the common misconceptions surrounding GDPR compliance and the potential consequences of non-compliance. With the right approach and the right representative, organizations can navigate the GDPR landscape successfully and build trust with their customers and stakeholders.

If you require assistance with GDPR compliance or need to appoint an Article 27 Representative, contact us today for expert guidance and support.

Hope you find this useful. If you need an EU Rep, have any GDPR questions, or have received a SAR or Regulator request and need help then please contact us anytime. We are always happy to help... GDPR Local team.

Recent blogs

The future of gdpr: anticipating gdpr 2.0.

Data protection and privacy have become paramount concerns for individuals and organizations alike.

Creating a GDPR Compliant Website: Essential Steps to Follow

In an era where data breaches have become commonplace, the GDPR emerges as a beacon of hope, aiming

GDPR AI: Your Ultimate Handbook for Building an AI Platform

In the vast landscape of technology, Artificial Intelligence (AI) continues to be at the forefront,

Get Your Account Now

Setup in just a few minutes. Enter your company details and choose the services you need.

Get In Touch

Not sure which option to choose? Call, email, chat to us anytime.

Stay Up-To-Date

Leave your details here and we’ll send you updates and information on all aspects of GDPR and EU Representative. We won’t bombard you with emails and you will be able to tell us to stop anytime.

Full Name is required!

Business Email is required!

Company is required!

Please accept the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy

Message is required!

Please accept the Terms of Use and the Privacy Policy.

Request Submitted

You have submitted your request successfully. Our team will contact you shorthly to prepare the custom pricing tailored for your needs.

Welcome to the Youth for Human Rights E-Course

Thank you for signing up! You’re about to learn each of your 30 basic human rights through videos, articles and interactive quizzes. With your login you can track your progress through the course, and any time you sign out, you can pick up where you left off when you sign in again.

Press the Continue button to begin.

Article 27 of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

• Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
• Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

Please provide the email address you used when you signed up for your account.

We will send you an email with a link to reset your password.

• Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)

Article 27 – Work and employment

   1. States Parties recognize the right of persons with disabilities to work, on an equal basis with others; this includes the right to the opportunity to gain a living by work freely chosen or accepted in a labour market and work environment that is open, inclusive and accessible to persons with disabilities. States Parties shall safeguard and promote the realization of the right to work, including for those who acquire a disability during the course of employment, by taking appropriate steps, including through legislation, to, inter alia:

a) Prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability with regard to all matters concerning all forms of employment, including conditions of recruitment, hiring and employment, continuance of employment, career advancement and safe and healthy working conditions;

b) Protect the rights of persons with disabilities, on an equal basis with others, to just and favourable conditions of work, including equal opportunities and equal remuneration for work of equal value, safe and healthy working conditions, including protection from harassment, and the redress of grievances;

c) Ensure that persons with disabilities are able to exercise their labour and trade union rights on an equal basis with others;

d) Enable persons with disabilities to have effective access to general technical and vocational guidance programmes, placement services and vocational and continuing training;

e) Promote employment opportunities and career advancement for persons with disabilities in the labour market, as well as assistance in finding, obtaining, maintaining and returning to employment;

f) Promote opportunities for self-employment, entrepreneurship, the development of cooperatives and starting one’s own business;

g) Employ persons with disabilities in the public sector;

h) Promote the employment of persons with disabilities in the private sector through appropriate policies and measures, which may include affirmative action programmes, incentives and other measures;

i) Ensure that reasonable accommodation is provided to persons with disabilities in the workplace;

j) Promote the acquisition by persons with disabilities of work experience in the open labour market;

k) Promote vocational and professional rehabilitation, job retention and return-to-work programmes for persons with disabilities.

2. States Parties shall ensure that persons with disabilities are not held in slavery or in servitude, and are protected, on an equal basis with others, from forced or compulsory labour.

Next: Article 28 – Adequate standard of living and social protection

List of Articles

Our Mandates

Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD)

Special Envoy of the Secretary-General on Disability and Accessibility

Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities of the Human Rights Council

DESA Forum on Disability and Development

Expert Group Meetings

International Day of Persons with Disabilities - 3 December

UN Voluntary Fund on Disability

History of disability and the United Nations

Frequently Asked Questions

Working at the United Nations

Handbook for Parliamentarians

Acknowledgements

Chapter 1: Overview

Chapter 2: In detail

Chapter 3: Monitoring

Chapter 4: Becoming a party

Chapter 5: National legislation

Chapter 6: Implementing the Convention

Chapter 7: Creating national institutions

Annex I: Convention

Annex II: Optional Protocol

Sustainable Development Goals

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Disability

• Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Global Action

Final draft of the outcome document for the UN Summit for sustainable development

Priority themes

Disability, accessibility and sustainable urban development

Monitoring and evaluation of disability-inclusive development

Women and girls with disabilities

Disasters and emergency situations

Mental health and development

Refugees and migrants with disabilities

Accessible tourism for all

Indigenous persons with disabilities

Development and human rights

Disability and sports

Financing for disability-inclusive development

Disability and the UN

The UN and Disabled Persons -The First Fifty Years

Subscribe to our Newsletter

General Assembly Reports and Resolutions

Security Council

Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC)

Commission for Social Development

Human Rights Council

Inter-Agency Support Group for the CRPD

Regional Commissions

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Handbook for Parliamentarians on the CRPD

UN Expert Group Meetings

Toolkit on Disability for Africa

Cosp sessions.

Fifteenth Session 2022

Fourteenth session 2021

Thirteenth Session 2020

Twelfth Session 2019

Eleventh session 2018

Tenth session 2017

Ninth session 2016

Eighth session 2015

Seventh session 2014

Sixth session 2013

Fifth session 2012

Fourth session 2011

Third session 2010

Second session 2009

First session 2008

CRPD Homepage

NGO/CSO/DPO Participation

List of NGOs accredited to the Conference of States Parties

NGOs in Consultative Status with ECOSOC - Search

How to apply for NGO Consultative Status with ECOSOC

Conference of States Parties to the CRPD

Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

Ratifications and Signatures of the CRPD and Optional Protocol

Map of Signatures and Ratifications

Status of Ratification Interactive Dashboard

Monitoring of Implementation

Civil Society

Convention in Brief

Timeline of Convention Events

Frequently Asked Questions on the Convention

Negotiation Archives

Featured: World Enabled ,  Women's Refugee Commission (disabilities section),  Disabled People's International (DPI), G3ict , GAATES , International Disability Alliance (IDA), International Disability and Development Consortium (IDDC), Rehabilitation International ,  Zero Project .

IDPD annual observances

NEW>> IDPD 2022

IDPD Main Page

Calendar by Year

Special envoy and covid-19.

Information from the UN System Everyone is talking about coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Be sure to get your facts from reliable sources. The UN offices, field missions, agencies, funds and programmes are providing new information as it becomes available.  Here are some of their resource pages .

• Fraud Alert
• Privacy Notice
• Terms of Use

The day’s top stories from around the world

Stay on top of the latest AI governance news and developments of the profession.

Original reporting and feature articles on the latest privacy developments

Where the real conversations in privacy happen

Exploring the technology of privacy

A roundup of the top Canadian privacy news

A roundup of the top European data protection news

A roundup of the top privacy news from the Asia-Pacific region

A roundup of the top privacy news from Latin America

A roundup of US privacy news

Talk privacy and network with local members at IAPP KnowledgeNet Chapter meetings, taking place worldwide.

Looking for a new challenge, or need to hire your next privacy pro? The IAPP Job Board is the answer.

Locate and network with fellow privacy professionals using this peer-to-peer directory.

Review a filterable list of conferences, KnowledgeNets, LinkedIn Live broadcasts, networking events, web conferences and more.

Learn how to surround AI with policies and procedures that make the most of its potential by reducing its risks.

Understand Europe’s framework of laws, regulations and policies, most significantly the GDPR.

Steer a course through the interconnected web of federal and state laws governing U.S. data privacy.

Learn the intricacies of Canada’s distinctive federal/provincial/territorial data privacy governance systems.

Develop the skills to design, build and operate a comprehensive data protection program.

Add to your tech knowledge with deep training in privacy-enhancing technologies and how to deploy them.

Introductory training that builds organizations of professionals with working privacy knowledge.

Meet the stringent requirements to earn this American Bar Association-certified designation.

The global standard for the go-to person for privacy laws, regulations and frameworks

The first and only privacy certification for professionals who manage day-to-day operations

As technology professionals take on greater privacy responsibilities, our updated certification is keeping pace with 50% new content covering the latest developments.

Recognizing the advanced knowledge and issue-spotting skills a privacy pro must attain in today’s complex world of data privacy.

The first title to verify you meet stringent requirements for knowledge, skill, proficiency and ethics in privacy law, and one of the ABA’s newest accredited specialties.

Ensures individuals responsible for AI systems can reduce the risks associated with this technology.

Mostre seus conhecimentos na gestão do programa de privacidade e na legislação brasileira sobre privacidade.

Certification des compétences du DPO fondée sur la législation et règlementation française et européenne, agréée par la CNIL.

This tool identifies global data protection authorities and privacy legislation.

The IAPP’s US State Privacy Legislation Tracker consists of proposed and enacted comprehensive state privacy bills from across the U.S.

Access all reports and surveys published by the IAPP.

This report shines a light on the location, performance and significance of privacy governance within organizations.

This year’s Privacy Risk Study represents the most comprehensive study of privacy risk undertaken by the IAPP in collaboration with KPMG.

On this topic page, you can find the IAPP’s collection of coverage, analysis and resources covering AI connections to the privacy space.

IAPP members can get up-to-date information here on the California Consumer Privacy Act and the California Privacy Rights Act.

The IAPP's EU General Data Protection Regulation page collects the guidance, analysis, tools and resources you need to make sure you're meeting your obligations.

Explore the full range of U.K. data protection issues, from global policy to daily operational details.

Expand your network and expertise at the world’s top privacy event featuring A-list keynotes and high-profile experts.

A new event in Brussels for business leaders, tech and privacy pros who work with AI to learn about practical AI governance, accountability, the EU AI Act and more.

Leaders from across the Canadian privacy field deliver insights, discuss trends, offer predictions and share best practices.

Hear top experts discuss global privacy issues and regulations affecting business across Asia.

P.S.R. focuses on the intersection of privacy and technology. The call for proposals to speak at the 2024 event is open. Submit your ideas today.

Europe’s top experts offer pragmatic insights into the evolving landscape and share knowledge on best practices for your data protection operation.

Gain exclusive insights about how privacy affects business in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand.

View our open calls and submission instructions.

Increase visibility for your organization — check out sponsorship opportunities today.

Start taking advantage of the many IAPP member benefits today

See our list of high-profile corporate members—and find out why you should become one, too

Don’t miss out for a minute—continue accessing your benefits

Privacy Perspectives | Is Article 27 the GDPR's 'hidden obligation'? Related reading: GDPR: Lost in translation?

Is article 27 the gdpr's 'hidden obligation'.

As we approach the last few weeks before ‘GDPR Day’ (if I keep calling it that, it’ll catch on…), almost all companies know at least something about the EU General Data Protection Regulation, even if it’s just that they don’t yet know enough! Statistics tell us that few companies will be 100 percent ready, but that almost all companies are now somewhere along their GDPR journey.

At least that’s what is happening in the EU. Outside of the Union, where the GDPR does apply to companies processing personal data of people in the EU, the situation is a little less clear.

The European Commission has done a poor job of notifying the rest of the world that they could face fines in Europe for the manner in which they process personal data, perhaps of the view that the privacy consultant market would be able to push this agenda for them. Certainly, the majority of consultants have been working to educate their non-EU clients, although too often the response is incredulity; why should they worry about a new law in the EU when they have no base of operations in Europe?

One of the prime areas where a lack of knowledge is placing non-EU companies at risk of GDPR fines is the representative obligation under Article 27.

For those unfamiliar with it, Article 27 requires companies that are not established in the EU, but that monitor or process the personal data of people within the EU, to appoint an EU-based representative to act as their Europe-facing point of contact for individuals and local data protection authorities. The purpose of this is simple: It ensures that EU citizens will be able to contact the controllers and processors outside of Europe that hold their personal data, without having the potentially confusing, difficult and costly efforts required to contact them at their base (imagine the situation in which a French citizen is trying to contact a data controller in a less-developed country with an unreliable postal system; the likelihood of them receiving a response within the regulatory response period of a month is very unlikely).

So why is the message on the representative not reaching the companies obliged to appoint one?

The main reason appears to be the lack of information on this role coming out of the EU. Companies outside of Europe that have appointed a privacy consultant will be receiving the benefit of that consultant’s expertise in respect of applying the GDPR to the specifics of their business, but, for companies that have chosen to go it alone, they will largely be basing their preparations on materials coming out of the EU – none of which will mention the representative, because that obligation doesn’t apply to anyone in the EU.

The result? Many companies around the world, even those that are taking seriously their preparations for the GDPR, are going to be in breach of this obligation and in line for a potential administrative fine of up to 10 million euros or 2 percent of global turnover.

Many companies around the world, even those that are taking seriously their preparations for the GDPR, are going to be in breach of this obligation and in line for a potential administrative fine of up to 10 million euros or 2 percent of global turnover.

Another likely reason for the relatively low appointment levels for representatives is the confusion between the role of the data protection officer appointed pursuant to Article 37 (an in-house role directing the company’s privacy and GDPR-compliance program) and the representative appointed pursuant to Article 27, which is appointed in an external role in the EU for that company. This is made considerably worse as a result of foreign language issues – many translations will give the same result for "officer" and "representative," which makes compliance much more difficult for companies based in jurisdictions where the first language isn’t European by origin.

What of the representatives themselves?

Companies offering this service have been slow to appear, mainly because of the liability the role attracts. Under Recital 80 of the GDPR, the representative “should be subject to enforcement proceedings in the event of non-compliance by the controller or processor.” This liability for the failures of their clients is an extraordinary step for the EU to have taken, and while the aim is noble (to ensure that a non-EU company can’t simply walk away without meeting penalties handed down), there is little in the way of precedent for giving such a high risk for an agent of a company. Compare the situation to that of a lawyer, which a third party would likely never be in a position to approach directly if they had suffered loss as a result of that lawyer’s client. With each EU country having some scope to add their own additional flourishes to implementation of the GDPR, there are also situations arising like that in Spain, where their draft Data Protection Act codifying the GDPR specifies that the representative would automatically have joint and several liability with their client for GDPR failures (and any other resulting penalties).

What should a data controller or processor look for in their representative?

Article 27 appears to only require that they be established in one country where the controller or processor has data subjects. However, as the controller/processor, you may want to ask yourself whether a representative in only one country would be capable of performing the role of representing a non-EU controller or processor to people based in an EU country far from that representative (i.e. using a representative based only in Spain may not provide adequate representation for data subjects based in Estonia or Romania). I personally suspect this is an area where the Court of Justice of the EU is likely to side with the individual and follow the intent of Article 27 to provide an effective EU contact location for those companies.

Despite that, the main reason a controller or processor is likely to want a representative with wider coverage is simply the increasingly important "customer experience" factor. If an individual is raising a subject access request with the controller processing their data, it is likely that individual already has concerns about the processing. At times like that, it’s important to make sure those customers are receiving the red-carpet treatment; doing so in the bad times can generate a significant amount of customer loyalty, whereas failing to do so is likely to result in a negative response and potentially a lost customer. In this respect, the representative can be seen as an offshoot of the customer services team for the controller or processor.

Which leads me on to one of the key reasons non-EU companies should consider the appointment of a representative as one of their first steps in their GDPR preparation: It is the obligation for which it is most immediately obvious where a company has failed to meet the requirement.

Whereas most GDPR obligations exist in the background where the controller or processor carries out the actual processing, the representative is front and center of the company’s data documentation. Put simply, if a company does not have a base in the EU and does not have details of their representative in their customer-facing privacy notice, it is immediately apparent that it's failed to meet the Article 27 duty. For the EU data protection authorities, spotting this failure is likely a red flag of potential non-compliance elsewhere; conversely, having a representative listed provides a clear indication to the DPAs (and anyone else) that the company is taking their GDPR responsibilities seriously.

There is one final question which I hear from companies outside the EU: “How does the EU think they’re going to enforce the GDPR outside of Europe?”

It’s a fair question, as decisions of the European courts have no weight of precedent outside of the EU. However, principles of international law will apply and the European fine will likely be enforceable outside the EU in most jurisdictions, although a visit to the local courts for their confirmation will probably be required in many cases. There is also a particular reason why it will be seen by non-EU countries as desirable to be able to enforce GDPR fines, which is the desire among the international community to obtain (or keep) an adequacy finding. This status, conferred upon countries deemed by the EU to have equivalent legal protections for personal data to those in the EU, is a very beneficial one for the international commerce of that country, as it allows organizations in that country to receive personal data from the EU without needing to provide evidence of additional measures put in place to protect that data as it passes across international borders. If a country fails to support a fine under the GDPR in its jurisdiction, it is likely to be treated by the EU as evidence of inferior protections for personal data and will impact that country’s assertion that it provides protections equivalent to the EU.

So, if your company or client is based outside the EU and processes the personal data of people in the EU, please ensure you have appointed your data protection representative under Article 27 of GDPR in time for GDPR Day. Don’t let the "hidden obligation" catch you out!

photo credit: Lawrence Wang 王治钧 落地玻璃上的反光+雨幕 Reflection +rain curtain on the windows #上海 #shanghai #shanghaicity #rain #umbrella #onlyiphone #phonepic via photopin (license)

15 Comments

If you want to comment on this post, you need to login .

• comment Robert Madge • May 3, 2018 It will take time for the message to sink in...
• comment Robert Cattanach • May 3, 2018 To be precise, Article 27 does not apply to "processing which is occasional, does not include, on a large scale, processing of special categories of data ...[Article 9] or processing of personal data relating to criminal convictions ...[Article 10} and is unlikely to result in a risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons taking into account the nature, context, scope and purpose of the processing" -- perhaps a not-insignificant exception for many modest-sized companies with only a website that processes occasional orders from EU residents and has modest data analytics.
• comment Peter Miller • May 3, 2018 Controllers and processors not established in the EU who have concerns about the extent and validity of GDPR’s extraterritoriality might also be considering whether appointment of an Article 27 representative – “mandated by the controller or processor to be addressed in addition to or instead of the controller or the processor by, in particular, supervisory authorities and data subjects, on all issues relating to processing for the purposes of ensuring compliance with [GDPR]” – amounts to consent to EU and Member State jurisdiction and thus a potential relinquishment of their ability to later challenge GDPR, whether directly or during the attempt to enforce a foreign judgment.
• comment Lyn Boxall • May 3, 2018 I am well aware that my clients to whom the GDPR applies need to appoint an EU representative. And I spent some time earlier this year trying to locate individuals/firms that might provide such services. I encountered confusion among potential appointees about their potential liability and thus a lack of appetite to take on the role, except at an exorbitantly high price. (Such pricing is quite understandable when liability is unknown - this is not a criticism of them). In addition, I have clients with business in all EU Member States without having an establishment in any of them. There is confusion as to whether the need an EU representative in many, if not all, Member States. I'm about to re-start the search in the hope that things have developed and changed and I can find a slate of candidates for my clients. Anyone with suggestions, please contact me and let me know - [email protected] in Singapore.
• comment Jennee DeVore • May 3, 2018 Article 27 uses the term "representative" and not "data protection officer" as discussed in Article 37. I'm concerned that this article may confuse this distinction. The representative is a data protection liaison that must work with the DPO but it does not necessarily need to be the DPO.
• comment Ryan Costello • May 4, 2018 I do not believe that Art. 27 was written with the intention of extending liability to EU representatives for the failures of their clients. Article 27 (5) specifically says that the "designation of a representative by the controller or processor shall be without prejudice to legal actions which could be initiated against the controller or processor themselves." I believe that language makes it clear that the representative is not "on-the-hook" for GDPR non-compliance on the part of the controller/processor. The fact that Spain seeks to introduce a joint and several liability provision for representatives only reinforces this point, in my view. I do concede that the language of Recital 80 stating that "the designated representative should be subject to enforcement proceedings in the event of non-compliance by the controller or processor" does muddy the water somewhat, but I believe the language suggests that the representative should be party to, or present for, those proceedings... the physical stand-in for the controller/processor, as it were... but does not extend liability to the representative for non-compliance. Moreover, recital language is not legally binding, unlike the regulatory text itself.
• comment Jeroen Terstegge • May 4, 2018 It’s a hidden, but also pointless obligation (which by the way already existed in the past 23 years). It’s pointless for several reasons: 1) the representative is not the DPO (although it could be), so representatives do not contribute to compliance and fair processing; 2) in the days of internet and e-mail contacting controllers by postal mail is completely outdated; 3) the data protection authorities may issue a fine directly against the representative (see recital 80), so many companies will find it hard to find a representative willing to take the fall for them first and hoping to be indemnified later. WhatsApp was forced by the Dutch DPA to appoint a representative in The Netherlands. In court, WhatsApp argued that it -unsurprisingly- couldn’t find one. The court noted that that is not a defense under the law. But this shows the problem. The riskier the company and the larger their turnover, the less likely they will be able to find a representative. On the other hand, the DPA’s enforcement priorities will generally not lie with the low-risk non-EEA companies that have failed to appoint a representative, so in such cases, appointing a representative is just an administrative burden. I expect that we will see a lot window-dressing here, where a shell company will be set up acting a representative that handles any data subject requests and DPA inquiries, but that goes bankrupt as soon as a fine is issued against it. The obligation for processors to appoint a representative is also pointless given the fact that data subjects and the DPA should first and foremost contact the controller in the EEA anyway, article 28 already requires that the data processor agreement must stipulate that the processor informs the controller on request that he provides all information relating to the processor’s compliance with the GDPR, and the controller is in principle jointly and severally liable for the processor’s non-compliance (art. 82.2), although he could in theory discharge himself (art. 82.3), but that is very hard to do given the heavy burden placed on the controller by art. 24. So in the end, the most logical way is that the controller acts as the processo’s representative.
• comment Diana Andrade • May 4, 2018 Congratulations, your article is excellent! The requirement is very well explained, the challenges of direct liability of the DP Reps and reasons for this being somehow a "hidden obligation" and the imminent risk for companies for not appointing a DP Rep when it's one of the first requirements SA's will look at when verifying compliance.
• comment Alejandra Brown • May 4, 2018 I am in the same situation as Lyn Boxall. I haven't been able to find a company in the EU that can represent some of my customers in Canada that do not have a physical presence in the EU, yet the EU is a big market for them. If anyone has some guidance around what specific companies will provide this service, I will appreciate your feedback as well. My email is [email protected]
• comment Karn Jani • May 7, 2018 Good insights Tim! Even though most of us have been busy talking about SARs, DPIAs, PbD, etc., it would not be wrong in assuming that this critical aspect of compliance would have been missed in a majority of compliance exercises/ audits. Having said that, Article 27 leaves a lot for interpretation and does not come out as a prominent 'to-do' item (aptly called 'hidden'). As mentioned in a few comments above, finding a EU representative who would be prepared to bear the burnt of enforcement actions is a tedious exercise, unless there is a guidance available. Recital 80 just makes the job more difficult. Nevertheless, as is the case at present, law firms established within EU could still continue to represent their non-EU clients, while the monetary liability factor would then be re-considered. But are the firms ready to put their neck in?
• comment Emma Butler • May 8, 2018 This will also become an issue for UK-based businesses after Brexit. Given the liability, no-one is offering these services, so it's unclear what small businesses are supposed to do.
• comment Ken Baylor • May 25, 2018 In the last few weeks a few new services have come online for EU Representation, from all over the EU. However, please choose the location of your EU Rep carefully: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/where-should-you-place-your-eu-representative-gdpr-ken-baylor-ph-d-/
• comment Jan Lange • Oct 19, 2018 Hi Tim, very nice article, congratulations! Now, five months after the go live of the GDPR it is quite surprising to see that not many non-EU companies have assigned a representative in the EU. Even most international airlines from non-EU countries that fly into EU do not have any information about a representative in the EU in their privacy notes, despite the fact that they process data of their EU customers on a regular basis (and not „occasionally“). I assume that we need the first rulings and case law in order to wake up companies regarding the EU GDPR requirements. Best regards, Jan from „idc-representative.de“
• comment Cornelia Maria Schmitt • Feb 28, 2019 This will also be very interesting in the context of Brexit. Companies outside of the EU, but with branches in EU might face that scenario as well unless they can clearly identify and prove that a branch in the EU can be identified as main establishment. Any thoughts?
• comment Nazeem Patel • Mar 13, 2019 Its about time that people that needs to work start working...

Related Stories

Gdpr: lost in translation, new study highlights lack of gdpr preparedness, most member states won't be ready for gdpr, avoiding three gdpr pitfalls, dpas to pros: there's no grace period, folks.

• library_books GDPR: Lost in translation?
• library_books New study highlights lack of GDPR preparedness
• library_books Most member states won't be ready for GDPR
• library_books Avoiding three GDPR pitfalls
• library_books DPAs to pros: There's no grace period, folks

Recent Comments

• comment A view from DC: Restoring privacy to the skies 1
• comment IAB seeks streamlined adtech privacy compliance with Diligence Platform 1
• comment Identifying global privacy laws, relevant DPAs 1
• comment European Parliament approves landmark AI Act, looks ahead to implementation 1

America's Founding Documents

The Constitution: What Does it Say?

The Constitution of the United States contains a preamble and seven articles that describe the way the government is structured and how it operates. The first three articles establish the three branches of government and their powers: Legislative (Congress), Executive (office of the President,) and Judicial (Federal court system). A system of checks and balances prevents any one of these separate powers from becoming dominant. Articles four through seven describe the relationship of the states to the Federal Government, establish the Constitution as the supreme law of the land, and define the amendment and ratification processes.

Article I  assigns the responsibility for making laws to the Legislative Branch (Congress). Congress is divided into two parts, or “Houses,” the House of Representatives and the Senate. The bicameral Congress was a compromise between the large states, which wanted representation based on population, and the small ones, which wanted the states to have equal representation.

Article II details the Executive Branch and the offices of the President and Vice President. It lays down rules for electing the President (through the Electoral College), eligibility (must be a natural-born citizen at least 35 years old), and term length. The 12th and 25th Amendments modified some of these rules.

Article III

Article III establishes the Judicial Branch with the U.S. Supreme Court as the federal court system’s highest court. It specifies that Federal judges be appointed for life unless they commit a serious crime. This article is shorter than Articles I and II. The Federal Convention left much of the work of planning the court system to the First Congress. The 1789 Judiciary Act created the three-tiered court system in place today.

Article IV outlines states’ powers in relationship to each other. States have the authority to create and enforce their own laws but must respect and help enforce the laws of other states. Congress may pass Federal laws regarding how states honor other states’ laws and records.

Article V explains the amendment process, which is different and more difficult than the process for making laws. When two-thirds of the Senate and two-thirds of the House of Representatives vote to change the Constitution, an amendment goes to the state legislatures for a vote. Alternatively, two-thirds of the state legislatures can submit an application to Congress, and then Congress calls a national convention at which states propose amendments. Three-fourths of the state legislatures or state conventions must vote in favor of an amendment to ratify it.

Article VI states that Federal law is supreme, or higher than, state and local laws. This means that if a state law conflicts with a Federal law, Federal law takes precedence.

Article VII

Article VII describes the ratification process for the Constitution. It called for special state ratifying conventions. Nine states were required to enact the Constitution. Rhode Island became the 13th state to ratify the Constitution in 1790.

Back to Constitution main page How Did it Happen?

• Skip to main navigation
• Skip to content
• Français

Codification Division Publications: Repertory of Practice of United Nations Organs

• Article 100
• Article 101
• Article 102
• Article 103
• Articles 104 and 105
• Article 105
• Article 106
• Article 107
• Articles 108 and 109
• Article 109
• Article 110
• Article 111
• Search the Entire Collection
• Reports of the Secretary-General
• Codification Division

Charter of the United Nations

Chapter v — the security council.

“ 1. Each member of the Security Council shall have one vote.

2. Decisions of the Security Council on procedural matters shall be made by an affirmative vote of nine members.

3. Decisions of the Security Council on all other matters shall be made by an affirmative vote of nine members including the concurring votes of the permanent members; provided that, in decisions under Chapter VI, and under paragraph 3 of Article 52, a party to a dispute shall abstain from voting. ”

* Advance version in English

• Written By Gregg Rosenzweig
• Updated: November 8, 2023

We’re here to help you choose the most appropriate content types to fulfill your content strategy. In this series, we’re breaking down the most popular content types to their most basic fundamentals — simple definitions, clarity on formats, and plenty of examples — so you can start with a solid foundation.

What is an article?

An article is a piece of writing that educates, informs and/or colorfully illustrates a topic using purpose-driven writing, provocative insights and a unique perspective designed to engage an audience.

Articles also can be…

• Branded/native content
• Content ladders
• Press releases
• Thought-leadership pieces
• Skyscrapers

The long and short of it

Depending on the outlet and channel you’re publishing in, article lengths will vary . However, as with any writing, you should never write one word more than is necessary to tell your story.

A general guide to article length:

• Short Form (500 words or less)
• Standard (500-1,500 words)
• Long Form (1,500-2,500 words)
• Extra Long Form (2,500+ words)

What can articles do for a business?

Different from advertising, articles allow you to expand on a topic and/or show expertise in your industry or niche, whether an editorial piece or a how-to template . They also afford you an opportunity to enlighten your audience on a deeper level.

Popular use-case examples for articles

Ads only get you so far. If you want to have a conversation with your audience, an article can inspire interactions with a reader, drive traffic to a page, and ultimately convert customers. 

• Content for social media channels with viral potential (FB, Twitter, and LinkedIn)
• Content for a company blog and to establish a content cadence
• Thought-leadership pieces that establish instant credibility in a given area

Reasons to write articles

• To inspire inbound marketing and allow you to hit your KPIs
• To expand brand awareness, build loyalty and advocacy
• To boost SEO and “page ranking” through the use of keywords and backlinks

Business types:

Whether you’re a pest control company or hotel chain, there’s always a story to tell. Literally any business, regardless of sector, can use articles to build a greater customer base.

Article examples – short form

Article examples – standard form

Article examples – long form

Article examples – extra long form

Article examples – listicles

Article examples – how-to’s

Article examples – interviews

Understanding content quality in examples

Our team has rated content type examples in three degrees of quality ( Good, Better, Best ) to help you better gauge resources needed for your content plan. In general, the degrees of content quality correspond to our three content levels ( General, Qualified, Expert ) based on the criteria below. Please consider there are multiple variables that could determine the cost, completion time, or content level for any content piece with a perceived degree of quality. 

More content types with examples:

• What Is an Article?
• What Is an Ebook?
• What Is a White Paper?
• What Is a Customer Story?
• What Is a Product Description?
• What Is an Infographic?
• What Is a Presentation?
• What Is a Motion Graphic?
• What Is an Animated Video?

Need help writing engaging, SEO-friendly articles? Talk to a content specialist at ClearVoice today. Our talented team of writers can easily handle all your content needs, freeing up your team’s time to focus on other parts of your business.

How to Measure Success in Content Distribution: Essential Metrics and KPIs

The Ultimate Spring Cleaning Checklist for Your Freelance Business

The Art of Freelance Pricing: How to Value Your Work and Elevate Your Income

• Content Production
• Build Your SEO
• Amplify Your Content
• For Agencies

Why ClearVoice

• Talent Network
• How It Works
• Freelance For Us
• Statement on AI
• Talk to a Specialist

Get Insights In Your Inbox

• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Service
• Intellectual Property Claims
• Data Collection Preferences

Please use our A-Z INDEX to navigate this site, or our HOMEPAGE  

Adopted and proclaimed by General Assembly resolution 217 A (III) of 10 December 1948

Article 27 ..

(1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.

(2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

Article 28 .

UNIVERSAL DECLARATION  OF HUMAN RIGHTS

This website is Copyright © 2021 Climate Change Trust & Injustice Alliance The views, performance reviews and opinions of the Trust are protected by Articles 18 and 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

• History Classics
• Your Profile
• Find History on Facebook (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Twitter (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on YouTube (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Instagram (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on TikTok (Opens in a new window)
• This Day In History
• History Podcasts
• History Vault

Constitution

By: History.com Editors

Updated: March 28, 2023 | Original: October 27, 2009

The Constitution of the United States established America’s national government and fundamental laws, and guaranteed certain basic rights for its citizens. 

It was signed on September 17, 1787, by delegates to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia. Under America’s first governing document, the Articles of Confederation, the national government was weak and states operated like independent countries. At the 1787 convention, delegates devised a plan for a stronger federal government with three branches—executive, legislative and judicial—along with a system of checks and balances to ensure no single branch would have too much power. 

The Preamble to the U.S. Constitution

The Preamble outlines the Constitution's purpose and guiding principles. It reads:

The Bill of Rights were 10 amendments guaranteeing basic individual protections, such as freedom of speech and religion, that became part of the Constitution in 1791. To date, there are 27 constitutional amendments.

Articles of Confederation

America’s first constitution, the Articles of Confederation , was ratified in 1781, a time when the nation was a loose confederation of states, each operating like independent countries. The national government was comprised of a single legislature, the Congress of the Confederation; there was no president or judicial branch.

The Articles of Confederation gave Congress the power to govern foreign affairs, conduct war and regulate currency; however, in reality these powers were sharply limited because Congress had no authority to enforce its requests to the states for money or troops.

Did you know? George Washington was initially reluctant to attend the Constitutional Convention. Although he saw the need for a stronger national government, he was busy managing his estate at Mount Vernon, suffering from rheumatism and worried that the convention wouldn't be successful in achieving its goals.

Soon after America won its independence from Great Britain with its 1783 victory in the American Revolution , it became increasingly evident that the young republic needed a stronger central government in order to remain stable.

In 1786, Alexander Hamilton , a lawyer and politician from New York , called for a constitutional convention to discuss the matter. The Confederation Congress, which in February 1787 endorsed the idea, invited all 13 states to send delegates to a meeting in Philadelphia.

Forming a More Perfect Union

On May 25, 1787, the Constitutional Convention opened in Philadelphia at the Pennsylvania State House, now known as Independence Hall, where the Declaration of Independence had been adopted 11 years earlier. There were 55 delegates in attendance, representing all 13 states except Rhode Island , which refused to send representatives because it did not want a powerful central government interfering in its economic business. George Washington , who’d become a national hero after leading the Continental Army to victory during the American Revolution, was selected as president of the convention by unanimous vote.

The delegates (who also became known as the “framers” of the Constitution) were a well-educated group that included merchants, farmers, bankers and lawyers. Many had served in the Continental Army, colonial legislatures or the Continental Congress (known as the Congress of the Confederation as of 1781). In terms of religious affiliation, most were Protestants. Eight delegates were signers of the Declaration of Independence, while six had signed the Articles of Confederation.

At age 81, Pennsylvania’s Benjamin Franklin (1706-90) was the oldest delegate, while the majority of the delegates were in their 30s and 40s. Political leaders not in attendance at the convention included Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) and John Adams (1735-1826), who were serving as U.S. ambassadors in Europe. John Jay (1745-1829), Samuel Adams (1722-1803) and John Hancock (1737-93) were also absent from the convention. Virginia’s Patrick Henry (1736-99) was chosen to be a delegate but refused to attend the convention because he didn’t want to give the central government more power, fearing it would endanger the rights of states and individuals.

Reporters and other visitors were barred from the convention sessions, which were held in secret to avoid outside pressures. However, Virginia’s James Madison (1751-1836) kept a detailed account of what transpired behind closed doors. (In 1837, Madison’s widow Dolley sold some of his papers, including his notes from the convention debates, to the federal government for $30,000.)

Debating the Constitution

The delegates had been tasked by Congress with amending the Articles of Confederation; however, they soon began deliberating proposals for an entirely new form of government. After intensive debate, which continued throughout the summer of 1787 and at times threatened to derail the proceedings, they developed a plan that established three branches of national government–executive, legislative and judicial. A system of checks and balances was put into place so that no single branch would have too much authority. The specific powers and responsibilities of each branch were also laid out.

Among the more contentious issues was the question of state representation in the national legislature. Delegates from larger states wanted population to determine how many representatives a state could send to Congress, while small states called for equal representation. The issue was resolved by the Connecticut Compromise, which proposed a bicameral legislature with proportional representation of the states in the lower house ( House of Representatives ) and equal representation in the upper house (Senate).

Another controversial topic was slavery. Although some northern states had already started to outlaw the practice, they went along with the southern states’ insistence that slavery was an issue for individual states to decide and should be kept out of the Constitution. Many northern delegates believed that without agreeing to this, the South wouldn’t join the Union. For the purposes of taxation and determining how many representatives a state could send to Congress, it was decided that enslaved people would be counted as three-fifths of a person. Additionally, it was agreed that Congress wouldn’t be allowed to prohibit the slave trade before 1808, and states were required to return fugitive enslaved people to their owners.

Ratifying the Constitution

By September 1787, the convention’s five-member Committee of Style (Hamilton, Madison, William Samuel Johnson of Connecticut, Gouverneur Morris of New York, Rufus King of Massachusetts ) had drafted the final text of the Constitution, which consisted of some 4,200 words. On September 17, George Washington was the first to sign the document. Of the 55 delegates, a total of 39 signed; some had already left Philadelphia, and three–George Mason (1725-92) and Edmund Randolph (1753-1813) of Virginia , and Elbridge Gerry (1744-1813) of Massachusetts–refused to approve the document. In order for the Constitution to become law, it then had to be ratified by nine of the 13 states.

James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, with assistance from John Jay, wrote a series of essays to persuade people to ratify the Constitution. The 85 essays, known collectively as “The Federalist” (or “The Federalist Papers”), detailed how the new government would work, and were published under the pseudonym Publius (Latin for “public”) in newspapers across the states starting in the fall of 1787. (People who supported the Constitution became known as Federalists, while those opposed it because they thought it gave too much power to the national government were called Anti-Federalists.)

Beginning on December 7, 1787, five states– Delaware , Pennsylvania, New Jersey , Georgia and Connecticut–ratified the Constitution in quick succession. However, other states, especially Massachusetts, opposed the document, as it failed to reserve un-delegated powers to the states and lacked constitutional protection of basic political rights, such as freedom of speech, religion and the press. 

In February 1788, a compromise was reached under which Massachusetts and other states would agree to ratify the document with the assurance that amendments would be immediately proposed. The Constitution was thus narrowly ratified in Massachusetts, followed by Maryland and South Carolina . On June 21, 1788, New Hampshire became the ninth state to ratify the document, and it was subsequently agreed that government under the U.S. Constitution would begin on March 4, 1789. George Washington was inaugurated as America’s first president on April 30, 1789. In June of that same year, Virginia ratified the Constitution, and New York followed in July. On February 2, 1790, the U.S. Supreme Court held its first session, marking the date when the government was fully operative.

Rhode Island, the last holdout of the original 13 states, finally ratified the Constitution on May 29, 1790.

The Bill of Rights

In 1789, Madison, then a member of the newly established U.S. House of Representatives , introduced 19 amendments to the Constitution. On September 25, 1789, Congress adopted 12 of the amendments and sent them to the states for ratification. Ten of these amendments, known collectively as the Bill of Rights , were ratified and became part of the Constitution on December 10, 1791. The Bill of Rights guarantees individuals certain basic protections as citizens, including freedom of speech, religion and the press; the right to bear and keep arms; the right to peaceably assemble; protection from unreasonable search and seizure; and the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury. For his contributions to the drafting of the Constitution, as well as its ratification, Madison became known as “Father of the Constitution.”

To date, there have been thousands of proposed amendments to the Constitution. However, only 17 amendments have been ratified in addition to the Bill of Rights because the process isn’t easy–after a proposed amendment makes it through Congress, it must be ratified by three-fourths of the states. The most recent amendment to the Constitution, Article XXVII, which deals with congressional pay raises, was proposed in 1789 and ratified in 1992.

The Constitution Today

In the more than 200 years since the Constitution was created, America has stretched across an entire continent and its population and economy have expanded more than the document’s framers likely ever could have envisioned. Through all the changes, the Constitution has endured and adapted.

The framers knew it wasn’t a perfect document. However, as Benjamin Franklin said on the closing day of the convention in 1787: “I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such, because I think a central government is necessary for us… I doubt too whether any other Convention we can obtain may be able to make a better Constitution.” Today, the original Constitution is on display at the National Archives in Washington, D.C. Constitution Day is observed on September 17, to commemorate the date the document was signed.

HISTORY Vault

Stream thousands of hours of acclaimed series, probing documentaries and captivating specials commercial-free in HISTORY Vault

Sign up for Inside History

Get HISTORY’s most fascinating stories delivered to your inbox three times a week.

By submitting your information, you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. You must be 16 years or older and a resident of the United States.

More details : Privacy Notice | Terms of Use | Contact Us

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

What we know and don't know about Baltimore's Key Bridge collapse

Ayana Archie

A container ship rests against wreckage of the Francis Scott Key Bridge as night falls on Tuesday, as seen from Sparrows Point, Md. Matt Rourke/AP hide caption

A container ship rests against wreckage of the Francis Scott Key Bridge as night falls on Tuesday, as seen from Sparrows Point, Md.

Rescue efforts have turned to recovery in the tangled wreckage of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore.

Authorities have recovered the bodies of two workers, and four others are presumed dead after a cargo ship struck the bridge early Tuesday morning, sending the structure — and anyone on it — plunging into the frigid Patapsco River.

Baltimore's bridge collapse is expected to disrupt supply chains

Federal investigators are trying to understand what led to the bridge's collapse, as the region braces for a long and costly rebuilding process.

Here's what we know:

Who was involved?

Authorities say eight people fell into the Patapsco River below after the collision. Two were rescued, with one person hospitalized while the other person refused medical treatment, Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott said.

The two bodies recovered from the river on Wednesday were those of construction workers who were repairing potholes on the bridge, authorities said Wednesday evening. They were identified as Alejandro Hernandez Fuentes, a 35-year-old resident of Baltimore who was originally from Mexico, and Dorlian Ronial Castillo Cabrera, a 26-year-old from Guatemala who lived in Dundalk, Md. They were both found inside a red pickup truck submerged in 25 feet of water.

More from WYPR in Baltimore:

• Construction worker says friends, colleagues missing in bridge collapse
• Federal government pledges full support to rebuild FSK bridge, reopen port

For the latest from member station WYPR in Baltimore head to wypr.org

Four other workers are still unaccounted for and presumed dead. Authorities say all of the men were originally from Mexico, Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador.

"Those are my friends, my co-workers," Jesus Campos told member station WYPR . "I could have been there like them."

Campos said he was scheduled to work on the bridge the following morning.

The U.S. Coast Guard suspended its search and rescue efforts late Tuesday night and said the six people are presumed to be dead, given the amount of time that had passed since the collapse and the temperature of the water. They resumed recovery efforts Wednesday morning.

Twenty-two people were aboard the ship and are all accounted for, said Synergy Marine Group , the company that manages the ship.

How did it happen?

The Picture Show

Photos: baltimore's key bridge collapses; search and rescue efforts continue.

The Dali, a nearly 1,000-foot-long container ship registered in Singapore, appeared to lose power as it began moving toward the bridge at about 8 knots, or 9.2 miles per hour.

Those onboard issued a mayday, said Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, which gave authorities time to stop the flow of traffic on the bridge.

The Dali crashed into one of the bridge's support pillars, and parts of the structure came down immediately, at about 1:30 a.m.

Federal investigators are seeking to understand why the ship drifted so far off course and crashed into the bridge.

Drone footage of the collapsed bridge and cargo ship recorded by federal investigators.

The chair of the National Transportation Safety Board, Jennifer Homendy, said investigators have recovered the voyage data recorder, which is similar to the black box recorders found on airplanes.

"We do have the data recorder," Homendy said in an interview with CNN on Wednesday morning. "We've sent that back to our lab to evaluate and begin to develop a timeline of events that led up to the strike on the bridge, and we hope to have that information to share with the public later today."

Investigators will also examine the ship's records and safety history, Homendy said, as well as the construction and structure of the bridge.

NTSB investigators typically take weeks or even months before releasing preliminary reports.

So far, law enforcement officials say there is no indication that the incident was intentional — but that hasn't stopped conspiracy theories from spreading on social media.

Cranes stand over shipping containers at the Port of Newark on Tuesday as seen from Bayonne, N.J. Supply chains at ports up and down the East Coast are expected to be affected after a cargo ship hit and collapsed the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore. Spencer Platt/Getty Images hide caption

Cranes stand over shipping containers at the Port of Newark on Tuesday as seen from Bayonne, N.J. Supply chains at ports up and down the East Coast are expected to be affected after a cargo ship hit and collapsed the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore.

Have there been any previous incidents involving the ship or bridge?

The ship has had 27 previous inspections. In 2016, it sustained significant damage to its hull after hitting a dock while leaving a port in Antwerp, Belgium. Last year, the ship was found to have a problem with "propulsion and auxiliary machinery," according to Equasis, a maritime safety site.

Baltimore's Key Bridge was built in the '70s, but has a deep and patriotic history

The Key Bridge, which is four lanes, 1.6 miles long and carries about 11.3 million vehicles a year, was fully up to code and had no structural issues, Moore said.

But it was the site of a previous incident: In 1980, another cargo ship ran into the bridge – and in that instance, its protective measures worked, NPR's Nell Greenfieldboyce reports. The collision destroyed a concrete structure around the bridge support, but the bridge itself was unharmed. However, cargo ships weren't nearly as big then as they are today, she notes.

Will the bridge be rebuilt?

Federal and local authorities immediately vowed to rebuild the bridge, but they cautioned that the process would not be fast or cheap.

"There is no exact precedent for this," Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg told NPR's Morning Edition .

Buttigieg declined to give a timeline of how long reconstruction might take, though he noted the original bridge took five years to build. And Buttigieg underscored the importance of reopening the shipping channel as quickly as possible.

Baltimore bridge collapse raises many issues for Transportation Secretary Buttigieg

"This port is the top vehicle handling port in the United States," Buttigieg said. "We can't wait for the bridge work to be complete to see that channel reopened. There are vessels that are stuck inside right now and there's an enormous amount of traffic that goes through there. That's really important to the entire economy."

President Biden said he wants the federal government to pay for the entire cost of reconstructing the bridge.

"We're gonna get it up and running again as soon as possible," Biden said on Tuesday. "Fifteen-thousand jobs depend on that port, and we're gonna do everything we can to protect those jobs and help those workers."

What we don't know

Authorities have not yet released any information about the pilot or captain of the ship, or why it seemed to lose power. The NTSB, the FBI and state officials are investigating.

The economic impact is also unknown, but it's likely to be huge.

Mercedes, GM, Stellantis scramble; Port jobs are at risk after Baltimore disaster

A large portion of the Baltimore port remains closed indefinitely. That port is just a fraction of the size of large ones in the U.S. like Newark, N.J., or Long Beach, Calif. But it plays an outsized role in auto imports and is economically significant to Maryland and the region.

About $80 billion worth of cargo goes through the Port of Baltimore each year, including about 850,000 cars and trucks. The port also provides 15,000 jobs, with about $3.3 billion in personal income, $2.6 billion in business revenue and $400 million in tax revenue, according to the state.

• francis scott key bridge
• Baltimore bridge collapse
• francis scott key

Baltimore bridge collapse: a bridge engineer explains what happened, and what needs to change

Associate Professor, Civil Engineering, Monash University

Disclosure statement

Colin Caprani receives funding from the Department of Transport (Victoria) and the Level Crossing Removal Project. He is also Chair of the Confidential Reporting Scheme for Safer Structures - Australasia, Chair of the Australian Regional Group of the Institution of Structural Engineers, and Australian National Delegate for the International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering.

Monash University provides funding as a founding partner of The Conversation AU.

View all partners

When the container ship MV Dali, 300 metres long and massing around 100,000 tonnes, lost power and slammed into one of the support piers of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore, the bridge collapsed in moments . Six people are presumed dead, several others injured, and the city and region are expecting a months-long logistical nightmare in the absence of a crucial transport link.

It was a shocking event, not only for the public but for bridge engineers like me. We work very hard to ensure bridges are safe, and overall the probability of being injured or worse in a bridge collapse remains even lower than the chance of being struck by lightning.

However, the images from Baltimore are a reminder that safety can’t be taken for granted. We need to remain vigilant.

So why did this bridge collapse? And, just as importantly, how might we make other bridges more safe against such collapse?

A 20th century bridge meets a 21st century ship

The Francis Scott Key Bridge was built through the mid 1970s and opened in 1977. The main structure over the navigation channel is a “continuous truss bridge” in three sections or spans.

The bridge rests on four supports, two of which sit each side of the navigable waterway. It is these two piers that are critical to protect against ship impacts.

And indeed, there were two layers of protection: a so-called “dolphin” structure made from concrete, and a fender. The dolphins are in the water about 100 metres upstream and downstream of the piers. They are intended to be sacrificed in the event of a wayward ship, absorbing its energy and being deformed in the process but keeping the ship from hitting the bridge itself.

The fender is the last layer of protection. It is a structure made of timber and reinforced concrete placed around the main piers. Again, it is intended to absorb the energy of any impact.

Fenders are not intended to absorb impacts from very large vessels . And so when the MV Dali, weighing more than 100,000 tonnes, made it past the protective dolphins, it was simply far too massive for the fender to withstand.

Read more: I've captained ships into tight ports like Baltimore, and this is how captains like me work with harbor pilots to avoid deadly collisions

Video recordings show a cloud of dust appearing just before the bridge collapsed, which may well have been the fender disintegrating as it was crushed by the ship.

Once the massive ship had made it past both the dolphin and the fender, the pier – one of the bridge’s four main supports – was simply incapable of resisting the impact. Given the size of the vessel and its likely speed of around 8 knots (15 kilometres per hour), the impact force would have been around 20,000 tonnes .

Bridges are getting safer

This was not the first time a ship hit the Francis Scott Bridge. There was another collision in 1980 , damaging a fender badly enough that it had to be replaced.

Around the world, 35 major bridge collapses resulting in fatalities were caused by collisions between 1960 and 2015, according to a 2018 report from the World Association for Waterborne Transport Infrastructure. Collisions between ships and bridges in the 1970s and early 1980s led to a significant improvement in the design rules for protecting bridges from impact.

Further impacts in the 1970s and early 1980s instigated significant improvements in the design rules for impact.

The International Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering’s Ship Collision with Bridges guide, published in 1993, and the American Association of State Highway and Transporation Officials’ Guide Specification and Commentary for Vessel Collision Design of Highway Bridges (1991) changed how bridges were designed.

In Australia, the Australian Standard for Bridge Design (published in 2017) requires designers to think about the biggest vessel likely to come along in the next 100 years, and what would happen if it were heading for any bridge pier at full speed. Designers need to consider the result of both head-on collisions and side-on, glancing blows. As a result, many newer bridges protect their piers with entire human-made islands.

Of course, these improvements came too late to influence the design of the Francis Scott Key Bridge itself.

Lessons from disaster

So what are the lessons apparent at this early stage?

First, it’s clear the protection measures in place for this bridge were not enough to handle this ship impact. Today’s cargo ships are much bigger than those of the 1970s, and it seems likely the Francis Scott Key Bridge was not designed with a collision like this in mind.

So one lesson is that we need to consider how the vessels near our bridges are changing. This means we cannot just accept the structure as it was built, but ensure the protection measures around our bridges are evolving alongside the ships around them.

Second, and more generally, we must remain vigilant in managing our bridges. I’ve written previously about the current level of safety of Australian bridges, but also about how we can do better.

This tragic event only emphasises the need to spend more on maintaining our ageing infrastructure. This is the only way to ensure it remains safe and functional for the demands we put on it today.

• Engineering
• Infrastructure
• Urban infrastructure
• container ships
• Baltimore bridge collapse

School of Social Sciences – Public Policy and International Relations opportunities

School of Social Sciences – Human Geography opportunities

School of Social Sciences – Criminology opportunities

School of Social Sciences – Academic appointment opportunities

Biocloud Project Manager - Australian Biocommons

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

More Young People Than Ever Will Get Colorectal Cancer This Year

Colon and rectal cancers are increasing among people younger than 50. Experts have a few ideas about why.

By Knvul Sheikh

Marisa Peters had been experiencing symptoms for years: blood on her toilet paper after going to the bathroom, changes in her stool and difficulty controlling the urge to poop. But she was in her 30s, healthy and physically active. She did not have any abdominal pain, and doctors dismissed the symptoms as hemorrhoids, or normal postpartum changes after the birth of her first son. When Ms. Peters finally visited a gastroenterologist in 2021, after having her third child and experiencing worsening bleeding from her rectum along with changes in her stool consistency, an urgent colonoscopy confirmed that she had colorectal cancer.

It had been four or five years since her symptoms had first emerged. Yet “I did not expect that cancer was going to be what they found,” Ms. Peters said.

A report published by the American Cancer Society in January suggests that rates of colorectal cancer are rising rapidly among people in their 20s, 30s and 40s — even as incidence is declining in people over the age of 65.

“It’s unfortunately becoming a bigger problem every year,” said Dr. Michael Cecchini, a co-director of the colorectal program in the Center for Gastrointestinal Cancers and a medical oncologist at Yale Cancer Center. He added that early-onset colorectal cancers have been increasing by about 2 percent per year since the mid-1990s. This increase has moved colorectal cancer up to being the top cause of cancer deaths in men under the age of 50 and the second-leading cause of cancer deaths in women under 50 in the United States.

In fact, experts are noticing a rise in early-onset colorectal cancers around the world — a trend that they are racing to explain.

Why is colorectal cancer increasing among young people?

Colon and rectal cancers share many similarities and are typically lumped into one category, called colorectal cancer. Studies, however, show that the increase in diagnoses is mainly driven by a rise in rectal cancers and cancers found in the left, or distal, side of the colon, near the rectum. “That maybe provides an important clue for understanding what might be going on,” said Caitlin Murphy, an associate professor and cancer researcher at UTHealth Houston.

Colorectal cancers in younger people also tend to be more aggressive, and they are often found at a more advanced stage, Dr. Murphy said. But most people affected by early-onset colorectal cancer are too young to be recommended for routine cancer screenings, which have helped decrease rates in adults over 50. In 2021, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force reduced the recommended age for starting colorectal cancer screening by just five years — from 50 to 45 .

A vast majority of colorectal cancer diagnoses are still made in people 50 and older. The American Cancer Society predicted last year that roughly 153,000 new diagnoses would be made in the U.S. in 2023, of which 19,550 would be in people younger than 50. But millennials born around 1990 now have twice the risk of colon cancer compared with people born around the 1950s, while millennials’ risk for rectal cancer is about four times higher than that of older age groups, according to a study published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute . That means diagnoses are likely to “continue going up as these higher-risk generations age,” Dr. Murphy said.

When cancer is found at a younger-than-usual age, doctors usually suspect that genetic mutations may be to blame. And some molecular studies suggest that tumors in early-onset colorectal cancers do have different mutations driving the cancer compared with tumors in older adults. Another piece of evidence that there is a genetic component: It is clear that having a first-degree relative who had colorectal cancer — or even a precancerous polyp — can increase your risk, Dr. Cecchini said. But genetic changes do not explain the full picture, he said.

Some research has linked lifestyle and dietary changes to increased rates of colorectal cancer in both young people and older adults. Recent generations have consumed more red meat , ultraprocessed foods and sugary beverages , and have been known to binge drink more frequently; between 1992 and 1998, cigarette smoking also increased before declining again, while physical activity has continuously declined for decades. All of these factors — along with the rise in obesity rates since the 1980s — are associated with cancer risk. But once again, none of them fully account for the increase in early-onset colorectal cancer.

“For a lot of these risk factors, like smoking, you have to be exposed for long periods of time before the cancer develops,” said Dr. Andrea Cercek, a co-director of the Center for Young Onset Colorectal and Gastrointestinal Cancers at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. And many patients in their 20s and 30s do not even fit in these risk groups, she said. “Many of our patients are athletes,” she said. “Many of them were never heavy, not even in childhood.”

Experts are beginning to investigate if there are other environmental drivers of early-onset cancer. For instance, some small studies have hinted at the idea that people who develop colorectal cancer at an early age have an imbalance of “good” and “bad” bacteria in their gut. Researchers are not only looking at antibiotic use, which can alter the gut microbiome, but also nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs that are used as painkillers, proton pump inhibitors that are used to counter stomach acid issues and several psychiatric medications that may be absorbed through the intestinal lining and have increased in use in recent decades, Dr. Cercek said.

Some experts believe exposure to toxic chemicals in the environment may also be to blame. “There’s patterns of environmental exposures by geography, by race, by sex, by all the things that we know colorectal cancer rates also differ by,” Dr. Murphy said.

For instance, for many years, the rates of colorectal cancer diagnoses were highest among non-Hispanic Black people, but research shows that these cancers increased more among non-Hispanic white people in the 1990s and early 2000s, Dr. Murphy said. Now, both groups have fairly similar rates of cancer. “Does this mean that white people are now being exposed to something that Black people have been exposed to for many, many years? We just don’t know yet,” Dr. Murphy said.

There are also geographic disparities in the increase in cancer, with experts seeing more cases emerge in cities and towns along the Mississippi River, in Southeastern states and in Appalachia, which may be explained by occupational exposures to trace elements like arsenic, chromium, and nickel , which are often used in coal production, chemical plants and other industries in those regions. So-called forever chemicals like per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, better known as PFAS , have been linked to other cancers and could also be driving some of the increase in early-onset colorectal cancer.

“I don’t think there’s going to be one smoking gun that explains everything,” Dr. Murphy said. “It’s a whole bunch of things.”

What can you do to identify and reduce your risk?

After Ms. Peters was diagnosed and started chemotherapy, radiation, and reconstructive surgery, she encouraged her younger sister and brother to get screened immediately. “Because now they had a family history of the disease,” she said.

The Colon Cancer Coalition has developed a script you can use to bring up colon and rectal cancer questions in conversations with relatives, which may help you determine whether you should be screened 10 to 15 years earlier than the current recommended age.

If you are not in contact with your immediate family or are unaware of their medical history, it is important to know the symptoms of colorectal cancer, such as unexplained abdominal pain, changes in your stool and rectal bleeding. If you have any of these symptoms, talk to a doctor and get tested to rule out cancer.

After her experience being dismissed by doctors, Ms. Peters founded an organization called Be Seen to raise awareness of symptoms and encourage people to pledge to be screened .

Colonoscopies remain the gold standard for screening because they allow medical experts to not only see where tumors are, but also to remove them in the same procedure. There are now several different ways patients can prepare their bowels — including liquid laxatives, pills and powders — that are not as uncomfortable as options that were available to previous generations. “I can promise you that doing a one-day cleanse to prep for a colonoscopy is far better than having poop coming out of your stomach into a bag,” Ms. Peters said. “Thankfully, it was temporary for me, but it’s not for many people.”

There is also a home test that can detect 92 percent of colorectal cancers through DNA in your stool, though it is less sensitive at picking up precancerous polyps and cannot be used to remove any tissue, Dr. Cercek said. A blood test that is on the horizon may further increase the number of people willing to get screened.

Even though the trend in early-onset colorectal cancers is concerning, “what I take away from it is that the time to intervene is even earlier,” Dr. Murphy said. “And certainly what is happening now is going to affect the health of generations many, many years from now.”

Knvul Sheikh is a Times reporter covering chronic and infectious diseases and other aspects of personal health. More about Knvul Sheikh

The Fight Against Cancer

Risk calculators can offer a more personalized picture of an individual patient’s breast cancer risk. But experts warn that the results need to be interpreted with the help of a doctor .

Early detection is a powerful weapon in preventing deaths from colon cancer, but many patients are reluctant to undergo colonoscopies or conduct at-home fecal tests. Doctors see potential in another screening method .

The human papillomavirus vaccine provides powerful protection against the leading cause of cervical cancer and against a strong risk factor for anal cancer. Here’s what to know about the shot.

A recent study adds to growing evidence that exercise is an important part of preventing prostate cancer , the second most common and second most fatal cancer in the United States for men.

No single food can prevent cancer on its own, but experts say that there are some that may help you build the best defense .

The F.D.A. has proposed banning the use of formaldehyde in chemical hair straighteners , which have been linked to increased cancer risk, particularly among Black women .

Chance Perdomo, ‘Gen V’ actor, dies at 27 after motorcycle crash

Chance Perdomo, a British American actor known for his breakout roles in “Chilling Adventures of Sabrina” and “Gen V,” has died after a motorcycle crash, the Associated Press reported , citing a statement from his publicist. He was 27.

“On behalf of the family and his representatives, it is with heavy hearts that we share the news of Chance Perdomo’s untimely passing as a result of a motorcycle accident,” the publicist said in a Saturday statement shared with the AP.

“His passion for the arts and insatiable appetite for life was felt by all who knew him, and his warmth will carry on in those who he loved dearest,” the statement said. “We ask to please respect the family’s wish for privacy as they mourn the loss of their beloved son and brother.”

According to the statement, no one else was involved in the crash. It was not immediately clear where or when the crash happened.

Mr. Perdomo’s most recent on-screen appearance was as Andre Anderson, a metal-wielding teen in the superhero series “Gen V,” which follows a group of young people with special powers as they navigate secrets and competition at the Godolkin University School of Crimefighting. The Amazon series, a spinoff of the critically acclaimed superhero series “The Boys,” was renewed for a second season in October .

He previously played the amorous warlock Ambrose Spellman in Netflix’s “Chilling Adventures of Sabrina” and was nominated for a BAFTA Award in 2019 for his portrayal of Jerome Rogers, a courier slowly drowning in debt, in BBC Studios’ “Killed by My Debt.”

Fans, studios and co-stars mourned Mr. Perdomo, whose “career was just starting out,” according to the Hollywood Reporter.

“We can’t quite wrap our heads around this,” the producers of “Gen V” said in a statement. “For those of us who knew him and worked with him, Chance was always charming and smiling, an enthusiastic force of nature, an incredibly talented performer, and more than anything else, just a very kind, lovely person. Even writing about him in the past tense doesn’t make sense. We are so sorry for Chance’s family, and we are grieving the loss of our friend and colleague. Hug your loved ones tonight.”

“The entire Gen V family is devastated by the sudden passing of Chance Perdomo,” Amazon MGM Studios and Sony Pictures Television, which produced “Gen V,” wrote in a statement.

“This hurts. A lot. What a young talented actor, and a great friend — gone way too soon. Was a pleasure to work with him in GenV. RIP Chance,” wrote actor Patrick Schwarzenegger, who played Golden Boy in the series.

Netflix expressed its condolences through an affiliate X account and said Mr. Perdomo would be “forever in our hearts.”

Forever in our hearts, sending condolences to the family and friends of Chance Perdomo. pic.twitter.com/H9D1aMkWtv — Strong Black Lead (@strongblacklead) March 31, 2024

Chance Perdomo was born on Oct. 19, 1996, in Los Angeles, according to Variety. He described himself in an interview as “a black child raised by a Latino mother in a white society with two nationalities.” He told MTV in 2021 that his mother had him young and he didn’t know his father well.

As a child, Mr. Perdomo moved with his mother to Southampton, a port city in southern England, Variety reported. He studied theater at Peter Symonds College in Winchester, where an early experience with acting pushed him “to take that leap of faith” and pursue it as a career, he told the New York Times in 2020. He also studied at the U.K.- and U.S.-based Identity School of Acting.

His roles in “Chilling Adventures of Sabrina” and “Gen V” helped him break out on the acting scene in the United States.

When he was 24, he told Gentleman’s Journal: “I have a philosophy of right time; right place.”

“We can’t control the time we’re in, but we can control the place we’re in,” he said. “So, if you work hard to be in the right place, then surely success is just a matter of time.”

Watch CBS News

Chance Perdomo, "Gen V" and "Chilling Adventures of Sabrina" actor, dies in motorcycle accident at 27

Updated on: March 30, 2024 / 7:39 PM EDT / CBS News

Chance Perdomo, an actor who starred in the television shows "Gen V" and "Chilling Adventures of Sabrina," died Saturday in a motorcycle accident, his publicist confirmed to CBS News. Perdomo was 27. 

"On behalf of the family and his representatives, it is with heavy hearts that we share the news of Chance Perdomo's untimely passing as a result of a motorcycle accident," his publicist said in a statement obtained by CBS News.

Perdomo was known for playing Ambrose Spellman in Netflix's "Chilling Adventures of Sabrina" and Andre Anderson in "The Boys" spinoff series "Gen V."

Perdomo's publicist said "no other individuals were involved" in the accident.

"His passion for the arts and insatiable appetite for life was felt by all who knew him, and his warmth will carry on in those who he loved dearest," the publicist's statement said. "We ask to please respect the family's wish for privacy as they mourn the loss of their beloved son and brother."

Amazon MGM Studios and Sony Pictures Television said in a statement they were devastated by the sudden passing of Perdomo.  In a separate statement, the producers of "Gen V" said he "was always charming and smiling, an enthusiastic force of nature, an incredibly talented performer, and more than anything else, just a very kind, lovely person."

"Even writing about him in the past tense doesn't make sense," the statement says. "We are so sorry for Chance's family, and we are grieving the loss of our friend and colleague."

More from CBS News

Person dead after officer-involved shooting at Homestead home

Diddy spotted throughout South Florida since federal raids on LA, Miami homes amid sex trafficking probe

Expanding Medicaid in Florida: Facing South Florida

Person dead after being struck by Amtrak train in Opa-locka, diverting traffic on Ali-Baba and Dunad Avenues

We've detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you're not a robot.

Why did this happen?

Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. For more information you can review our Terms of Service and Cookie Policy .

For inquiries related to this message please contact our support team and provide the reference ID below.