This theory takes a more realistic and pragmatic approach to the law by considering customary practices and the circumstances surrounding a conflict. Fundamentally, this relies on the perception that the law arises from precedent, which makes it binding on similar cases. It is true that the main role of the judiciary is to interpret the law, but its actions tend to give life and practical meaning to the law. Supported by the fact that courts are free to use their discretion in deciding cases. This theory does not exclude the fact that law can be formulated by other mechanisms, but considers courts as the ultimate determinants of the legal rights and duties of the parties to a conflict. The focus then shifts to the effects that law has on a given society to meet its ever-changing needs. Say no to plagiarism. Get Custom Essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get Original EssayJustice Holmes, the founder of the bad man theory, was of the opinion that the law is nothing but 'a prediction as well as an experiment. From a villain's point of view, the transparency of his trial process will allow him to predict the outcome. Because the villain places little importance, among other things, on morality and focuses more on the extent of the punishment he faces. In Kenya, the judiciary was established by Article 159 of the Constitution. In order to exercise the judicial authority vested in him by the Kenyans, he is an independent guardian of justice. Its mandate is to formulate and implement judicial policies as well as compile and disseminate case law. This theory fits well with Kenyan jurisprudence. For example, in the case of Stephen Odhiambo v. Republic [2016] eKLR, the appellant was convicted of attempted rape in contravention of section 4 of the Sexual Offenses Act 2006 and also charged with assault and battery in contravention of the article 251 of the Penal Code. Initially, he was sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment, but later reduced to 8 years on appeal. In light of the subject, the case of R v R marked the development of marital rape in which the husband was accused of attempted rape of his wife. Lord Keith overturned the assumption that a marriage comes with implied consent to sexual relations, making allegations of marital rape irrelevant. Affirming that a union is more like a partnership in which the parties are entitled to equal rights and treatment. Surprisingly, by September 1997, the custom was that marital rape charges could be filed in court and victims would eventually receive justice. Civil damages were inevitable for rapists, even after they escaped criminal prosecution. The Constitution of Kenya, through Article 2(5), leaves room for the applicability of common law within its jurisdiction. However, common law precedents are persuasive in nature, thus giving courts the flexibility to be influenced or not by their decision. Unless they focus on notions of prerogative rights subject to article 25 of the supreme law. It is precisely for this reason that, although marital rape is rather impossible to prove, victims can still rely on battery as a form of domestic violence fully covered by the law. The fight against inequality has been going on since time immemorial. There was a big impact and the change was seen and experienced on a continental scale. This is no exception to Kenya as a country, although it is a developing country..