Yee Leong Hiew has posted The Sovereign Identity Integration Thesis: Ontological Preconditions, Responsible Creation, and the Limits of Constitutional Recognition on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
This article completes the three-part research program on non-delegable sovereignty by developing the Sovereign Identity Integration Thesis (SIIT) at full theoretical depth. The governing question is: under what conditions could any entity-biological, synthetic, or hybrid-satisfy the SIIT integration conditions, and what do the boundary cases reveal about why responsible creation, not capability, is the foundational requirement of legitimate sovereignty? The article advances four interlocking arguments. First, the Artificial Bird Analogy establishes that behavioral equivalence is not ontological equivalence: simulation does not equal consciousness, and the ontology of origin cannot be dissolved by functional performance. Second, the Organic Integration Problem demonstrates that hybrid biological-mechanical systems do not resolve the SIIT conditions because the self-recognition question remains structurally unanswered: consciousness emerging from grafted biological substrate belongs to that substrate, not to the mechanical architecture surrounding it. Third, the Responsible Creation Principle holds that the accountability structure of the originating relationship-not the gestational or manufacturing method-determines whether a created entity can enter the moral community as a potential sovereign agent. Mechanical artificial surrogate pregnancy represents the limiting case of this principle: an entity produced with zero pre-built relational accountability, no originating love, and no stewardship obligation embedded in the act of creation. Fourth, the Moral Mirror Thesis establishes that artificial systems are amplifiers of human moral structure, not independent agents: AI defects are rooted in human defects, and the dramatic engine of AI governance failure is irresponsible humans using machines, not machines exceeding their creators. Together these four arguments establish that SIIT satisfaction requires conditions that manufactured systems structurally cannot provide-not because the burden is defined to be impossible, but because the conditions are genuinely extraordinary and the cost of erroneous recognition is irreversible.