Secrecy Surrounds Suit Filed by CIA Spy : Law: Female agent alleges that the agency treated her unfairly because of her gender. Specific charges are heavily censored.

WASHINGTON —  In a legal case that is enveloped in secrecy, one of the CIA’s senior female spies has gone to federal court to protest alleged injustices based on her gender.

Protected by a pseudonym, “Jane Doe Thompson” claims that her troubles began after she filed a complaint against her deputy four years ago “for beating his wife to the point of strangulation.” Thompson was then the CIA station chief in a Caribbean area country.

The heavily censored lawsuit charges that she “thereafter became the target of an inspector general investigation initiated by the male deputy” and several other people she had disciplined for other reasons. The overseas post she headed “was known to and admitted by the CIA to be a problem office,” the court papers said.

Although offered a higher position in the CIA in the spring of 1991, her promotion was withdrawn after another male employee “stated he would not work for a woman,” according to the lawsuit.

The complaint comes at a time when the spy agency is negotiating an administrative settlement in another case--a class-action sex discrimination complaint brought in 1991 by women employed in the CIA’s operations directorate, the division that handles foreign espionage and covert actions, in which “Thompson” also works.

The complaint in that case claims there has been a systematic denial of promotion opportunities for women and that, when female employees complain about it, they are instructed to have a psychological evaluation. Members of Congress who sit on committees overseeing the agency said the clandestine service is still largely a male bastion, although it has recently worked to promote women.

Director of Central Intelligence R. James Woolsey, named as principal defendant in the “Thompson” suit, acknowledged after taking office last year that sex discrimination had been a problem. He promised to try to remedy it.

Overall, women today hold about 12% of the CIA’s senior operations, analysis and administrative posts, which is up from only 6% five years ago, according to the agency’s figures.

A spokesman for Woolsey said he could not comment on the merits of either the “Thompson” case or the class-action complaint because they are in the hands of agency lawyers.

The “Thompson” complaint, filed under seal in federal court after her administrative reviews were exhausted, provides a number of detailed allegations that remain classified because CIA lawyers have persuaded the court that their disclosure would compromise people and places involved in agency operations overseas.

However, several legal motions that were unsealed in Alexandria, Va., district court have parted the curtain on some charges. The plaintiff alleges, for example, that the offending male deputy “admitted . . . his history of physically abusing his wife.” Nonetheless, he “was never investigated by the agency and was later promoted,” the motions claim.

“Thompson” said she believed this conduct over a period of years constituted a federal offense because it occurred “on United States government leased property while posted abroad and under diplomatic cover,” according to the complaint.

“Thompson” charged that the CIA also failed to investigate her reports of other “specific instances of misconduct” by male employees in her office, including repeated drunkenness, sexual misconduct and one employee’s threat to kill a security guard.

Victoria Toensing, a Washington lawyer representing “Thompson,” has also complained about the conduct of CIA lawyers responsible for responding to claims in the lawsuit. In correspondence and legal briefs unsealed by the court, Toensing charges that the agency’s office of general counsel has abused its authority under a secrecy agreement that the CIA requires from attorneys representing agency employees.

Under the agreement, the CIA has authority to censor any agency-related lawsuit before it is made public. The purpose is to protect classified information.

In court papers, Toensing contends that CIA officials have had nearly a month to approve a censored version but have not done so--keeping the complaint itself from public view. She said CIA lawyers originally told her it would take no more than two days for them to delete any classified material from the complaint.