A PLUMBER AT JUSTICE?

Correction: In an editorial on Friday criticizing Attorney General Dick Thornburgh's efforts to severely limit press coverage of his department's affairs, we wrongly characterized news stories concerning Rep. William Gray as "a lie." The report that Rep. Gray, at the time a candidate for the post of Democratic whip, was involved in a Justice Department investigation of wrongdoing was true, and it was accurately rendered by the first and several subsequent journalists who made it public. The problem was that these accounts were quickly misconstrued, casually enlarged upon and/or manipulated by others into a false impression that Rep. Gray was the target of an investigation -- which he was not. That was the falsity -- not the reporters' original accounts. (Published 12/4/89)

ATTORNEY GENERAL Dick Thornburgh says the Justice Department "leaked like a sieve" when he arrived there last year and that he intends to plug all the holes. The department is conducting a review of its public information policy, and it appears that Mr. Thornburgh is heading in the direction of stonewalling inquiries, punishing those who talk to the press and centralizing all control in his own office. It won't work, and it shouldn't.

There have already been signs of the direction this "reform" is taking. On Tuesday the Bureau of Prisons announced new rules imposing harsh and unfair restrictions on contacts between federal prisoners and reporters. After press and civil liberties groups protested, the attorney general revoked the rules and is now reviewing them. The Immigration and Naturalization Service also issued a directive this week advising all employees in every INS office and border station around the country that they may not talk to reporters without prior approval from Washington. What an egregious and unworkable restriction.

Why is all this lip-zipping perceived to be necessary? Justice Department spokesmen cite three cases. They are right on one. Incorrect information about an investigation supposedly involving Rep. William Gray (D-Pa.) was leaked at a time when he was seeking a leadership post in the House. No one has the right to reveal grand jury information or unsubstantiated charges under investigation. In Rep. Gray's case, the offense was worse. It wasn't a leak, it was a lie.

Another case offered as an example of press abuse concerns the arrest of a drug seller in Lafayette Park. After the arrest, this paper published a story reporting that the transaction had been purposely set up in front of the White House in order to provide punchy material for a presidential speech. That wasn't an illegitimate leak, it was a political embarrassment and deservedly so -- exactly the kind of thing that should be reported.

Finally, Mr. Thornburgh alleges that the investigation of Felix Bloch has been stalled because it was revealed in the press. The fact is that Mr. Bloch himself was told that he was under investigation on June 22. His neighbors -- alerted by massive FBI surveillance -- figured that out about a week later; friends and colleagues in the State Department were contacted in June, as was the government of Austria. There was no information in the press until ABC broke the story on July 21. It was a report of events known widely, even by the man under suspicion.

The Justice Department is a public agency, and citizens have a right to know what goes on there. With few exceptions -- truly secret criminal investigations, for example -- there's no justification for refusing to allow discussion about prison conditions, immigration enforcement decisions, civil rights policy and the day-to-day work of the department.

Richard Nixon -- even with a staff of expert "plumbers" -- learned the folly of trying to conduct secret government. Mr. Thornburgh will undoubtedly find that the task is usually self-destructive as well as futile.

Articles appear as they were originally printed in The Washington Post and may not include subsequent corrections.