Exit Sessions, Enter Freeh : The FBI could definitely use a period of stability

The Federal Bureau of Investigation is a crucially important government agency that has rarely been without controversy. At various times in its nearly 70-year modern history it has been accused of racism, of political repression, and, certainly, of institutional arrogance and a lack of accountability. And, for sure, its directors, more often than not, have proved to be figures of controversy.

The most glaring example, of course, was J. Edgar Hoover, though it’s important to remember that the first director of the FBI achieved an impressive measure of professionalization in the bureau. His would-be successor, L. Patrick Gray III, appointed acting director by President Richard Nixon, had to resign, disgraced after the revelation that he had burned Watergate-related evidence in his fireplace. And now William S. Sessions, appointed 5 1/2 years ago by then-President Ronald Reagan, has been sacked by President Clinton.

The Sessions saga is more a tale of insensitivity, aloofness and uncaring conduct than anything heinous. But with the revelations of ethical abuses, Sessions’ position became more and more untenable and it became necessary for him to go. When the former federal judge would not resign voluntarily, Atty. Gen. Janet Reno recommended to the President that Sessions be fired. On Monday he was.

That leaves the bureau temporarily with an acting director--Floyd I. Clarke, the deputy director--as it awaits Senate confirmation, probably after the summer recess, of U.S. District Judge Louis J. Freeh, Clinton’s choice to replace Sessions.

If confirmed, as expected, Freeh should seek to build on the reputation for intelligence, integrity and personal probity that was set by Director William H. Webster in the 10 years prior to Sessions’ tenure. And he should also take a cue from his boss, Atty. Gen. Reno, who nowadays is marketing the mantra of “law enforcement cooperation.”

In the old days, law enforcement cooperation to the FBI sometimes meant letting other law enforcement agencies (usually the local police) do all the work, then swooping down at the last minute to appear at the triumphant press conference. But in the new FBI, the old arrogance has been giving way to a different spirit.

That spirit may well be exemplified by local FBI head Charlie J. Parsons, the special agent in charge of the Los Angeles office. The recent roundup of alleged members of a white supremacist ring was notable for the way that local, state and federal agencies worked together for the public good. That kind of cooperation can only redound to the bureau’s credit; it’s always classy to share the credit. Parsons seems to understand that well. It’s all to the benefit of public safety.