Several years ago Congress passed a law protecting the citizenry against unnecessary violations of privacy. And rightly so – individual privacy is a cherished right in our society. Unfortunately. though. this and state laws are being interpreted in some instances to shield records of individual criminal activity to the detriment of society. The situation was called to the attention of Congress this month by Rep. Robert J. Lagonarsino, R-Calif. who cited an editorial from the Los Angeles Times on the subject. Only last month the editorial asserted. the FBI refused to release the criminal-arrest record of the man accused of murdering Dr. Michael J. I-lalberstan, saying disclosure would intrude on the suspects privacy. “Subsequently it was revealed that he was an escaped felon who had been sentenced to prison four times and arrested at least 25 times,” the editorial said. The editorial cited other cases, including: – When an employee of a Texas mental institution was accused of raping a patient. it was discovered he previously had been convicted of rape. Texas law denied the hospital a right to screen his arrest record before employment. – In the District of Columbia. a man obtained a custodian’s job at an apartment house for women. Only after he had murdered a tenant was it revealed that he was a convicted rapist and burglar. Supporters of suppression of criminal records argue, no doubt with good Eintentions. that disclosure harms the released offender’s chances for employment. But what of the rights in society in general? Making criminal justice records available to public inspection is the democratic safeguard against abuses in the system. Federal and state laws should be examined for quirks not intended at time of passage. Any law that restricts access by the public and news organizations to records of arrests. trials. verdicts and sentences especially should be reconsidered.