The Uri Party made the decision following party Policy Coordination and Unification, Diplomacy and Trade committee meetings in which Foreign Ministry and Unification Ministry made reports about the contents of the bill and its prospects in the U.S. Senate.

On Monday, Uri Party chairman Shin Ki-nam visits the Korean navy's 2nd fleet in Pyeongtaek, Gyeonggi Province and looks around Chamsuri 357.

Rep. Yu Seon-ho, a head member of the Unification, Diplomacy and Trade Committee, said in a meeting briefing that, "We positively evaluate the bill as an expression of interest in the improvement of human rights in North Korea... There may be concerns, however, that the bill could have a negative influence on the six-party talks currently underway and intra-Korean relations."

Yu explained that by "negative influence," he meant, "The specific contents of the bill could offend North Korea's pride, and from North Korea's position, it could be taken as pressure related to regime collapse... We plan to study countermeasures that promote the Korea-U.S. relationship and peace on the Korean Peninsula."

In order to do this, the Uri Party decided to "deeply consider" the North Korea Human Rights Act at the subcommittee level as a first stage, and also decided to consider plans to invite experts to public hearings and bull sessions on the bill.

In regards to the bill's unanimous passing by the U.S. House, some lawmakers made an issue of the easygoing attitude of the Foreign Ministry and other authorities.

One lawmaker lashed out, saying, "The bill might as well call for the North and South not to discuss issues on the Korean Peninsula, and you [the Foreign Ministry] say there's no problem?"

Meanwhile, Rep. Jeong Bong-ju, who considered pushing an Assembly signature campaign opposing the North Korea Human Rights Act, decided to hold off on doing so, saying, "As we've decided to consider the issue at the party level, I will not collect signatures for now."

(englishnews@chosun.com )