MSPs last night agreed to back the general principles of high court reform legislation by 112 votes to 0, despite widespread concerns about some of its controversial proposals, including tagging reluctant

witnesses.

At the first reading of the Criminal Procedure (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill, MSPs gave cross-party support to its overall aims but questioned many of its specific measures.

The bill, which aims to improve the speed and efficacy of the high court system, was generally welcomed by the justice 1 committee earlier this month but its report expressed grave concerns about specific proposals, including plans to hold trials in the absence of the accused and to tag witnesses.

Cathy Jamieson, the justice minister, yesterday defended the plans to overhaul the system, including the most controversial proposals criticised by the committee. She said they were ''designed around the needs of the law-abiding many, not for the law-breaking few''.

In the first full parliamentary debate on the bill, she said: ''I am well aware that our plans to allow trials to take place when the accused is absent have been controversial. But I believe they are an important element in helping us to rebalance the system in favour of victims. By agreeing the principles of this bill, parliament will take a vital step forward in delivering a justice system fit for the twenty-first century.''

The bill, which is based on the recommendations of high court judge Lord Bonomy, proposes earlier disclosure of evidence between Crown and defence, extended powers for sheriffs, new preliminary hearings ahead of trials, and an extension of the 110-day custody time limit for commencing high court trials to 140 days.

Ms Jamieson said provisions to increase sheriffs' custodial sentencing powers from three to five years would start in the spring as planned. She said it was necessary to tag witnesses who deliberately refused to attend court because otherwise they would have to be jailed.

However, a number of MSPs questioned the details of the bill and called for the minister to ensure amendments were made at the second reading.

Michael Matheson, the SNP deputy justice spokesman, questioned the executive's approach to ensuring earlier disclosure of evidence between Crown and defence and its commitment to scrapping the 110-day rule.

On trials held in the absence of the accused, he said: ''The majority of evidence heard on this proposal was opposed to it, including from lord justice general Lord Cullen, so I would hope the minister would reconsider this proposal at stage two.''

Margaret Mitchell, Tory deputy justice spokeswoman, said her party supported all the recommendations except the change to the 110-day rule.

''This, we believe, would delay justice unnecessarily, as we are firmly of the opinion that the case has not been made to justify the ditching of this rule which has existed for centuries and which has become a

cornerstone of the Scottish criminal justice system,'' she said.

Pauline McNeill, convener of the justice 1 committee, said she was ''really concerned'' about the impact on the workload on sheriff courts of taking on a large number of less serious high court cases. She said early disclosure was key to the bill's success, and called for stronger mechanisms to ensure this principle was adhered to as set out in Lord Bonomy's report.

Margaret Smith, the LibDem justice spokeswoman, and her party colleague Mike Pringle, suggested that increasing the additional sentence penalty available for those who ''did a runner'', currently two years, might prove more effective.

Ms Smith told the Labour justice ministers the committee felt ''important principles were at stake'' and that the accused would not get a fair trial. ''We were also convinced, having taken evidence from legal practitioners, that this proposal is not workable. However, we saw some merit in allowing the trial to continue when all the evidence has been led,'' she said.