Press Release: Priya Sarathy Jones Selected as Member of the Council on Criminal Justice – Fines and Fees Justice Center

Appointment to Council on Criminal Justice Reinforces Commitment to Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

A recent report indicates that Priya Sarathy Jones, co-executive director of the Fines and Fees Justice Center, has been elected as a member of the Council on Criminal Justice (CCJ). This appointment is a significant development in the effort to align the United States criminal justice system with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those focused on poverty reduction, equality, and institutional justice.

Advancing SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

The appointment and the collaborative work of the involved organizations directly support the targets of SDG 16, which aims to promote just, peaceful, and inclusive societies.

• Promoting the Rule of Law: The CCJ’s core mission to advance understanding of criminal justice policy and build consensus for evidence-based solutions is fundamental to strengthening the rule of law and ensuring equal access to justice for all.
• Developing Effective Institutions: Sarathy Jones’s advocacy for a system where individuals are treated with respect and dignity contributes to building more effective, accountable, and inclusive justice institutions.
• Catalyzing Systemic Improvements: The CCJ functions as a catalyst for systemic improvements based on facts and evidence, a key component for achieving the targets outlined in SDG 16.

Tackling SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities)

A primary focus of Sarathy Jones’s work is the economic impact of the justice system on vulnerable populations, which directly correlates with SDG 1 and SDG 10.

• Eradicating Poverty (SDG 1): The initiative directly confronts how unjust fines and fees perpetuate a “devastating cycle of poverty and debt.” Addressing this issue is a targeted intervention to end poverty in all its forms.
• Reducing Inequality (SDG 10): By seeking to reform financial penalties that disproportionately affect low-income individuals, the work aims to reduce inequalities within and among countries by ensuring the justice system does not entrench economic disparity.

Fostering Partnerships and Inclusive Leadership (SDG 17 & SDG 5)

The structure of the CCJ and this new appointment exemplify the principles of multi-stakeholder partnerships and inclusive leadership, which are critical for sustainable development.

1. Partnerships for the Goals (SDG 17): The election of Sarathy Jones creates a strategic partnership between an advocacy organization (Fines and Fees Justice Center) and a national think tank (CCJ), combining grassroots expertise with high-level policy influence to achieve shared justice goals.
2. Multi-stakeholder Collaboration: The Council’s membership is intentionally diverse, including professionals from law enforcement, courts, policymaking, advocacy, and business, as well as directly impacted people. This model embodies the multi-stakeholder approach essential for implementing the SDGs.
3. Gender Equality (SDG 5): The appointment of a prominent female leader to an influential national council on criminal justice highlights progress toward ensuring women’s full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership in public life.

Institutional Framework of the Council on Criminal Justice

The CCJ’s operational model is designed to ensure objectivity and impact in its mission to reform the criminal justice system.

• Mandate: An independent, nonpartisan organization that advances public safety and justice through research, policy development, and consensus-building.
• Governance: The Council is led by a Board of Directors and an advisory Board of Trustees composed of distinguished leaders in public policy, law, and civil rights.
• Membership Criteria: Members are elected based on practical impact, intellectual achievement, dedication to research-based policymaking, and potential to contribute to the field.
• Operational Independence: To maintain its nonpartisan integrity, the Council does not apply for government grants or contracts and does not engage in lobbying.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 1: No Poverty

  The article directly connects the issue of criminal justice fines and fees to poverty. Priya Sarathy Jones is quoted as saying that “hundreds of thousands of people in our country remain saddled with unjust fines and fees that they cannot pay, perpetuating a devastating cycle of poverty and debt.” This highlights how the justice system’s financial penalties can be a direct driver of poverty, trapping individuals and families in debt, which is a core concern of SDG 1.

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

  The focus on creating a “fairer… justice system for everyone” and addressing “unjust fines and fees” implicitly points to SDG 10. Such systems often disproportionately affect low-income individuals and marginalized communities, thereby exacerbating existing inequalities. The effort to reform these policies is an effort to reduce inequalities of outcome and ensure that the justice system does not penalize people based on their economic status.

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  This is the most prominent SDG related to the article. The entire mission of the Council on Criminal Justice (CCJ) is to “advance understanding of the criminal justice policy choices” and “build consensus for solutions that enhance safety and justice for all.” The article’s central theme is the reform of the criminal legal system to make it more just, fair, and effective. This aligns perfectly with the goal of building effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at all levels.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices.

   The work of the Fines and Fees Justice Center, as described in the article, directly addresses this target. The characterization of fines and fees as “unjust” implies they are a discriminatory practice that leads to unequal outcomes based on a person’s ability to pay. Reforming this system is a direct action toward eliminating a policy that perpetuates inequality.

2. Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.

   The statement about building a “fairer and more effective justice system for everyone” is a clear reflection of this target. When individuals are trapped in a “cycle of poverty and debt” due to court-imposed financial obligations, their access to justice is severely hampered. The inability to pay can lead to further legal troubles, creating a barrier to the principle of equal justice.

3. Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.

   The CCJ’s approach of using “research, policy development,” “facts, evidence, and fundamental principles of justice” to serve as a “catalyst for system improvements” directly supports the development of more effective and accountable justice institutions. The goal is to move away from punitive systems that are ineffective and create negative social outcomes, towards a more evidence-based and accountable system.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

The article does not mention official SDG indicators, but it implies metrics that could be used to measure progress in this area:

• Implied Indicator for SDG 1 (No Poverty): Number of individuals living in poverty due to court-related debt.

  The article mentions “hundreds of thousands of people in our country remain saddled with unjust fines and fees that they cannot pay.” A direct indicator of progress would be a reduction in the number of people whose income falls below the poverty line as a direct or indirect result of financial sanctions imposed by the justice system.

• Implied Indicator for SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions): Prevalence of unjust fines and fees within the legal system.

  Progress towards a “fairer and more effective justice system” could be measured by tracking the number of jurisdictions that reform their fines and fees policies. A decrease in the imposition of fees that individuals cannot pay and the elimination of punitive consequences for non-payment (like license suspension or incarceration) would serve as a key indicator of improved access to justice for all.

Summary of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: finesandfeesjusticecenter.org