Managing to drag itself away briefly from 'I'm a celebrity, get me out of here', the Sun took aim on its front page this week at the solicitor advising Muslim cleric Abu Hamza on his deportation case.

In an article headlined '200k right hook', the tabloid claimed that Southall-based Mudassar Arani had 'raked in more than 200,000 of taxpayers' cash last year' (9 February).

The paper focused on Ms Arani, and said she had claimed in an interview that there is a war being waged against Islam - 'which will shock millions of non-Muslim Britons who bear no hostility towards the religion'.

Ms Arani's choice of car was also deemed worthy of a mention.

'Mercedes-driving Ms Arani, 40, was paid 210,111.44 in legal aid in 2003,' the red-top said, 'and is one of the main reasons why Hamza, 46, is still in Britain despite having his citizenship taken away'.

But at the end of the story, the paper said he has been refused legal aid for his special immigration appeals commission hearing, and quoted Ms Arani as saying: 'I don't represent him on that matter.'

However, legal aid solicitors received a more sympathetic hearing elsewhere, and from a somewhat unlikely source - The Daily Telegraph (5 February).

'Imagine you are a skilled and dedicated professional, running your own business but paid largely by the state,' wrote legal editor Joshua Rozenberg.

'Respect from the public is as rare as gratitude from your less deserving clients.

And yet you carry on, comforted by the knowledge that you have a vital role to play in delivering justice.'

He went on to describe as a 'bombshell' the news from the Legal Services Commission that there are too many defence lawyers in urban areas and that services could be provided with substantially fewer.

Nicholas Inge, a partner at a south London firm, was quoted as saying: 'I love the work that I do and would hate to leave it behind.

But there has been a gradual and insidious cropping of profits and performance incentives over the last ten years.

'This is a situation that has to get worse before people recognise the disaster that's on the horizon.'

Mr Rozenberg mentioned the government's recently announced cuts to the scope of criminal legal aid in the same breath as the claim by David Lammy, parliamentary under-secretary at the Department for Constitutional Affairs, that he has a 'broader vision' of legal aid that will guarantee access to justice.

'But that is not what you hear from the people who are dedicated to providing it,' Mr Rozenberg solemnly concluded.

Elsewhere, the fate of the profession post-Clementi was exercising the mind of former Law Society Council member Christopher Digby-Bell.

'The Law Society is heading for the boneyard this year - but no one seems to care,' he lamented in The Times (3 February).

Mr Digby-Bell called on 1970s songstress Carole King - hitherto little known for her views on legal affairs - for inspiration, suggesting that her song 'It's too late, baby, it's too late' neatly sums up the profession's reaction.

Self-regulation will be the first casualty of the review, he suggested, but retaining it 'is about as likely as Mary Poppins running a branch of Ann Summers'.

Without self-regulation, the Law Society will 'slip into the shadows'.

Mr Digby-Bell added that few would argue that regulatory reform is overdue but warned the government to tread carefully.

'We may not have much public support, but the profession is a vital part of the fabric of our society,' he said.

'Go too far and it could bite back.'

So what, he asked, to do? 'To echo the famous rallying cry of JFK: ask not what your governing body can do for you - ask what you can do for your profession.'

Philip Hoult