Having a voting and a non-voting class of shares is relatively common around the world, tbh. Jack Ma held 53% of voting shares, so he should've theoretically kept control.

This doesn't really sound like a decision based on the rule of law, but more like a political one designed to specifically hurt Jack Ma's power, especially considering his "absence" a few years ago.

This ruling isn't turning the company into a co-op. All it did is shift power from one group of rich chinese people to another. It's not really anything to celebrate.