Not exactly true. The YT claim system is optional. Either party can bypass it and force it through the DMCA/other legal process if they want (the claimee can do this by filing a dispute+appeal). Of course doing this opens the claimee to potentially far more dire consequences if the claimant chooses to for example file a lawsuit against the claimee, which is why disputing+appealing can be dangerous and most creators aren't willing to do it (or they might just dispute but choose not to follow a rejected dispute with an appeal).

The benefit of the YT claim system is that 1) it usually gives a good enough remedy to copyright holders such that they won't feel the need to file DMCA takedowns or lawsuits against creators 2) it isn't subject to the DMCA's repeat infringement requirement (which manifests itself on YT and most other platforms as a 3-strikes-your-out policy) 3) it offers far more granular remedies (a claim won't always result in the video being taken down for instance) and 4) it's optional! If a claimee is willing to defend their content against a DMCA takedown or in court if need be, then they can always dispute+appeal

On the other hand, one of the big disadvantages of the claim system is that it makes navigating YT copyright confusing as hell to those unfamiliar with it. The misinformation that's so prevalent on the claim system just makes everything so much worse. Not entirely sure how YT could improve that TBH.