The interview was conducted by Kashika Jain and Yusra Abidi, Editors at CCCPL. Rohit Arora shares his insights on the gap between academic learning and real enforcement experience in competition law, and reflects on how limited enforcement activity in India has shaped career opportunities in the field. He discusses the impact of digital markets and AI on competition practice, the importance of following global enforcement trends, and his practical approach to tracking antitrust developments. He also reflects on his transition to independent practice, highlighting greater autonomy, strategic decision-making, and the growing role of AI tools in legal work.

​

The following questions aim to capture Mr. Rohit Arora’s reflections on his journey in competition law:

​

1. From your vantage point, what are the most common knowledge gaps you observe in students or new entrants to competition law practice? What are the ways in which students can bridge these gaps?

​

Rohit Arora: From what I have observed, most students today have the foundational concepts in place. The real gap lies elsewhere, they simply don’t get enough exposure to actual enforcement work. Competition law is a practice-heavy field, and unless you have seen how a case is built, investigation unfolds, how evidence is assessed, or how a theory of harm is developed, it’s difficult to move from classroom understanding to practical competence.

And the reality is that this gap is not something students can easily fix on their own. Opportunities depend on the volume of enforcement—how many investigations the CCI initiates and how many penalties it imposes. When the pipeline of cases is limited, the number of meaningful opportunities for young practitioners naturally remains limited as well.

 

2.With algorithms, data markets, and digital platforms reshaping antitrust, how is the day-to-day work of a competition lawyer changing? What new technical/non-legal skills are becoming essential?

​

Rohit Arora: Yes, algorithms, data markets, and digital platforms are reshaping antitrust — but they’re not reshaping the day-to-day life of a competition lawyer. The core workflow remains the same: understanding markets, building a case or a defense, and developing a coherent theory of harm or theory on efficiencies if you are representing the opposite party.

Digital issues add a layer of complexity, not a new routine. So, while the sector is evolving on paper, the everyday work for most practitioners in India hasn’t fundamentally changed. The real shift is in how complex a case becomes, not in how a lawyer spends their day.

​

3. How much significance does study of international competition law have relative to understanding the law’s domestic implementation? What are some lesser-known jurisdictions that are performing well in this area?

​

Rohit Arora: You don’t need to study international competition law to understand how Indian law works. The CCI’s framework stands on its own. I started looking at international cases for a different reason — I was honestly bored with how slow things were moving in India. Exploring other jurisdictions made the subject exciting again because you suddenly see how a wide range of industries are being scrutinised around the world.

Some lesser-known agencies are doing genuinely impressive work.

• Greece is extremely active in uncovering Resale Price Maintenance (RPM) violations.

• Turkey consistently investigates and enforces across sectors.

• Brazil detects cartels at a regular pace.

• South Africa used to be a favourite, but after their website revamp in 2025, I’ve lost track of updates.

• Russia was another standout — they were busting cartels almost every month and were early movers in investigating algorithmic collusion.

These jurisdictions may not always be in the global spotlight, but the enforcement energy there is real and worth following.

​

4. For students and new practitioners, the volume of antitrust news can be overwhelming. Your ability to consistently identify and analyse the most significant trends is a skill we all hope to develop. Could you share your methodology for filtering information? What does your process look like, from tracking sources to deciding what makes the final cut in your publication?

​

Rohit Arora: Honestly, there’s no complex methodology. I follow a very simple routine.

I open the websites of different competition authorities, go straight to their news or press-release section, and bookmark the pages I check often. Anything that looks interesting, I save as a PDF.

After that, I just run it through an AI tool. I use the same prompt every time so my summaries stay consistent. This is literally the exact prompt I use:

“Summarize the following press release in no more than 200 words.
Focus strictly on:

– The business conduct under investigation (what the company/companies allegedly did, how the conduct worked, and why it raised competition concerns).

– The action taken by the competition authority (investigation findings, penalties, orders, commitments, remedies, or any procedural milestones).

Write the summary in a clear, neutral, and concise style suitable for an international competition-law newsletter.

Exclude promotional language, quotes, and unrelated background.
Avoid legal commentary or opinion; stay close to the facts as stated in the press release.”

If the output looks sharp and factual, it goes into the newsletter. That’s literally the whole process, nothing fancy, just consistency.

​

5. You have extensively covered the CCI's Market Study on AI, outlining 10 key competition concerns, from algorithmic collusion to self-preferencing. In your view, which of these emerging risks is the most challenging for a lawyer to practically investigate and prove, given the current legal framework?

​

Rohit Arora: The CCI’s AI Market Study is really just the tip of the iceberg.

Most of what it flags has already been identified as anti-competitive or abusive in other jurisdictions. The real challenge is not in the document itself — it’s in what sits beneath it.

For a competition lawyer, the toughest part is figuring out where the real friction points are in the AI stack. And that usually means looking closely at AI infrastructure providers. One issue that deserves far more attention is how Application Programming Interface (API) limits are imposed on startups. It looks technical on the surface, but it can shape market access, scale, and competitiveness in a very direct way.

So, the biggest challenge isn’t proving the familiar theories of harm — it’s detecting the subtle, infrastructure-level behaviour that never shows up in market studies but has massive competitive impact.

​

6. You have stated before that the passion in the field far exceeds its demand. In this context, how has the practice in this field evolved in the 8 years of your experience, and how do you see it evolving in the coming years?

​

Rohit Arora: I’ve basically lived on the CCI website for years — I’ve read around 600+ cases till now, and I’ve gone through the full archive more times than I should admit. If you look at the pattern, CCI was at its absolute peak between 2014 and 2016. Those were the crazy years — 100+ decisions annually, nonstop activity.

After 2017, the graph just dipped. And honestly, it has stayed low ever since. That’s why I say the passion in this field is way higher than the actual demand. Everyone is excited about competition law, but the number of real enforcement opportunities hasn’t matched that energy.

Do I see this changing soon? Not really. I hope it does — desperately — but right now the trend line hasn’t moved in years.

​

7. How have you integrated AI-powered legal research tools or large language models into your own workflow? How can newcomers learn to use these tools effectively and ethically?

Rohit Arora: I’ve definitely been an early adopter of Large Language Models (LLM). I use different tools for different parts of my workflow — ChatGPT for ideation, Claude for drafting, Grok when I want sharper analysis, and Perplexity for quick web research. It’s basically like having a small team on standby.

As for newcomers, they’re already using these tools every day, so the learning curve isn’t really the issue. The more you experiment, the better you get at knowing which tool fits which task. On the ethics side, I don’t have a big philosophy to share — just use common sense, don’t paste confidential material, and you’re fine.

​

8. What prompted your shift from a law firm to becoming an independent counsel? With the benefit of hindsight, what has been the most significant difference between the two practice environments, and is there a particular aspect of the latter that you did not anticipate?

​

Rohit Arora: My shift to independent practice wasn’t some grand career plan — it was a coincidence. In October 2020, I left my last job. Before I even started applying for competition law roles, I filed an information against Zomato. That case had been on my radar ever since a delivery failed to show up one day.

After that, I applied for multiple competition law vacancies, and none of my applications even got shortlisted. That genuinely scared me — I thought everything I’d learned about competition law would just disappear into thin air. So, I started posting online, mostly to keep myself connected to the subject. Ten months later, a client randomly slid into my DMs, and things shifted overnight. That’s how the independent journey began.

The biggest difference between a law-firm environment and independent practice is simple: I’m my own boss now. I don’t need layers of approval to build an antitrust strategy or structure a case. I can take decisions, experiment, and execute without waiting for anyone’s green light.

And the part I never anticipated? That cases aren’t won on merits alone. There’s a whole world beyond the legal arguments — timing, perception, strategy, the way you present the story — all of it matters far more than I initially realized.

​___________________________________________________________________________________________________​

Advocate Rohit Arora is an independent counsel specializing in Competition Law. He has represented clients before the Competition Commission of India (CCI), National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), and Supreme Court of India in the matters concerning Competition Act, 2002. He publishes Antitrust Enforcement Actions, a monthly newsletter on Linkedin providing in-depth coverage of latest developments in global competition law and enforcement.