Even the guy who invented WDRP has since come out and said it should die (http://www.circleid.com/posts/20120719_a_confession_about_ic...)
WAP is WDRP with the added bonus that you have a gun to your head to comply. It's just nuts. I was really hoping this would have been overturned by the time our renewal came around.
1) ICANN does have a system in place for development of their policies, being a registrar you have a voice and even the public gets a say during their policy comment periods.
2) The intention of the policy was to curb fake information being provided for domain contacts. This was partially a response to the legal community saying basically why have the contact info if its not even legitimate
While the process is more work, its also hard to argue with the concept that if you have to provide information about the registrant of a domain, that information should be accurate. The policy also helps ensure that the information stays as up to date as possible.
To date there has not been one single documented instance of the WAP fulfilling one objective of LEA or preventing a single instance of cybercrime since it's inception.
It is patently ridiculous in implementation given that it does nothing to prevent blatantly fake whois data (see the screen grab from my example where I successfully verified "Some Guy" as the domain registrant).
It's just a half-assed flawed implementation of a horribly flawed policy that only accomplishes two things:
1) throwing registrants under a bus, especially since the ones most likely to burned by this are technically less sophisticated rule followers and
2) utterly screwing registrars, since we end up holding the bag when these domains go offline.
How will asking the provider of deliberately fake details to confirm the deliberately fake details magically make the details less fake?