In his exclusive interview to APA Ali Karimli, leader of Popular Front Party of Azerbaijan (PFPA) stated that, Musavat's hesitation towards establishing of a new alliance composed of ANIP, Movement of National Union and Azadliq bloc showed that the party will not join the new alliance.

According to A.Karimli, there is a great difference between Musavat's decision to go to parliament and the same decision passed by PFPA in 2000: "First of all, Ali Karimli who determined to go to parliament in 2000 took the initiative of boycotting the parliament in 2005 when he was the parliament member. My mandate was not annulled that time. Our two representatives were declared winners alongside me. I want to say that, I proposed boycotting whereas there was a chance to set up a satisfactory group in the parliament. On the other hand, the opposition of Azerbaijan didn't aim at replacing the authority in 2000.The only goal of the parties was to be elected to the parliament that time.

The matter was about the representation of several oppositionists in the parliament obviously. We hadn't undertaken the responsibility of any revolution and the society had no expectations on any serious changes at that time. The opposition was not organized, on the contrary, it joined the elections with the atmosphere of cold war.

We faced pressures of Musavat and other parties in the period of election campaign. But, we joined the 6 November elections as united election bloc and the supporters of ADP and PFPA had great roles in Musavat members' wining seats.

However, in 2000 Musavat did its best to prevent PFPA from winning seats. Nevertheless, since, PFPA could win 5-6 seats in the parliament, it had no obligations before Musavat party and others. But the situation is different now: we won the seats together. So, our victory is shared. We agreed to pursue the same policy before and after these elections beforehand, however, there wasn't any agreement in 2000.

On the other hand, the shared achievements of the opposition of Azerbaijan were not enough tenure victory in the parliament that time. But, there was a chance for better representation. Musavat, even claimed that, as if it won 40% of the vote on proportional system. But, of course, if wasn't so. Thus, we also had facts and the figures claimed by them were exaggerated. I can prove it by one argument. Immediately aftermath the election, Isa Gambar declare in the press conference that the party had won 24% of the vote. The materials of that press conference were published in the newspaper Yeni Musavat, you can find it.

After a while they considered that the mentioned figure was forgotten and they declared 40%. But, even 40% meant 10 persons in the proportional representation of 25 seats. We won 6 seats and it wasn't all of out vote. We would have been minority in the parliament even if we won all the seats we had claimed. It means, there was no chance for change of authority. But in these elections, more than 70 candidates, 50 of them from Azadliq not being under the government's influence were elected to the parliament. The opposition and neutrals won the majority.

We were obliged to take this step in 2000. During one of the gatherings aftermath the 2000 elections, I had offered my colleagues to accept our legitimacy as PFPA. Thus, when I called on our parliament members to refuse the mandates I was to have an argument to convince them in return of which they would recognize us as a party. But we faced some difficulties.

I want to describe the attitude towards us and they drew PFPA to benefit from representation in the parliament in order to preserve its existence. But, Musavat has not existence problem. If Musavat goes to parliament for the sake of its existence let it say it demonstratively."

Responding to the question about the reason why the party had signed the treaty on missing the work of parliament which was not fulfilled, the PFPA chairman stated that, it was pointless to fulfill the item of the treaty on going to parliament as the items envisaging stopping functioning against one another and holding of massive rallies were violated.

A.Karimli also stated that, there are no opportunities for cooperating with Musavat, excluding nationwide issues: "Decision of Musavat damaged the solidarity in Azadliq bloc and is against general policy. This fact cannot be ignored," he said.

The PFPA chief stated that boycotting the parliament and the re-elections is pointless: "The party admits that it is pointless to boycott both the re-elections and the parliament. However, the party will stand for its principles. Thus, our goal was not to lose the confidence of people, as well. Therefore, the party isn't going to change its decision. Mr.Hassanli still obeys the party decision and he can think about it again. This issue was discussed in the party. If one decides to go to parliament or participate in the re-elections he can do it independently without being the party member. PFPA member cannot possibly go to parliament or participate in the re-elections."

Stating that, this decision can be changed theoretically by the majority of the vote of the Supreme Assembly members, Ali Karimli said there are few that wants to change this decision: "It is clear for everyone that we have made this decision consciously. We have a delegate to participate in re-elections and we will be given at least 1-2 seats. But, we don’t need it."

A.Karimli stressed the necessity of those willing to join the re-elections should submit an application on resigning from the party.