On the 16th August Anjem Choudary and Mohammed Rahman were convicted of offences under the Terrorism Act - inciting support for Islamic State.
In the wave of media coverage which followed, the public was informed that the convictions relied in part on the work of an undercover police officer, 'Kamal' who had infiltrated Al-Muhajiroun in Luton, in order to gain information on its members.
It is unusual for the police or the Security Service to admit infiltrating an Islamic organisation in this manner. Whilst the work of Kamal would obviously come out at trial when he gave evidence, here the authorities have clearly gone further, assisting both the BBC and Daily Mirror with media coverage of his work in this, and another case where jihadists from Luton were convicted of plotting to murder a US servicemen in East Anglia.
There could be two reasons why we are hearing of 'Kamal' now:
1. As I understand it, Al-Muhajiroun are unable to organise at mosques in Luton, having been chased away by rival Salafis from the Luton Islamic Centre. This means the police can declare Kamal, without Luton Muslims complaining the police have been spying inside local mosques and Islamic Centres. Indeed press coverage of Kamal's work centres on his monitoring of meetings at a venue hired from local Methodists, not Muslims.
2. The police have had a deserved battering in the press and from the public ever since the revelations about Bob Lambert and the Special Demonstration Squad began. This is a goal back - no one is going to question whether Kamal's work was justified, and it can be wheeled out as part of the case for the defence the next time damaging revelations emerge about the conduct of undercover officers. It is also in the police's armoury when/if the Pitchford Inquiry into undercover policing goes badly.
As such, we may not have heard the last of 'Kamal.'