Actually, what has been the perennial debate on competition law in this century?
Is the debate primarily concerned with the variety and the ever-changing quality of the purpose of competition law?
Or is the debate primarily concerned with the degree of reasonable central intervention of the market?
Or is the debate primarily concerned with the theoretical approach of analysis of the Harvard and Chicago School (e.g. Bork's theory)?
Or is the debate primarily concerned with the niceties of the law itself in regulating anti-competitive behaviours?
What exactly is so debatable in competition law????