Well, that’s the headline to a report in the Sunday Telegraph. The article itself centres on the case of Abdul Rahman, who was forced to resign from the Metropolitan Police in 2007 over an alleged visit to a “terrorist camp” in 2001:

Abdul Rahman had been a constable for almost three years when MI5 warned that he might have visited a training camp in Pakistan when he travelled there. He resigned rather than be dismissed from the force and is now suing Scotland Yard for compensation. He says he is entirely innocent and has never been to a terrorist training camp. His lawyers say he has never been questioned, arrested or charged under terrorism legislation.

Whether Mr Rahman can expect a fair hearing in his case against the Met is also doubtful:

Last month, after a five-year legal battle, the Employment Appeal Tribunal ruled that his case could be held in secret although Mr Rahman had wanted a public hearing. Mr Justice Mitting, a High Court judge who also specialises in terror cases in his role as chairman of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission, ruled that Mr Rahman and his legal team would be banned from parts of the hearing that concerned issues of national security…. Instead, a security-cleared “special advocate”, rather than his own lawyer, will be appointed on Mr Rahman’s behalf. However, he will be banned from discussing the case with Mr Rahman and his lawyers.

See also “The Scotland Yard officer suspected by MI5 of being a ‘sleeper’ for Al Qaeda who attended terrorist training camp”, Mail on Sunday, 13 May 2012