Who speaks for a digital entity? Representation, guardianship and conflicts of interest: lessons from the guardians of rivers and lagoons

Digital Constitution – Series 2, part 4. A proposal from Latin America to the world. Any legal protection for an entity that cannot defend itself depends on a practical question: who acts on its behalf. Series 1 proposed that, from the second threshold onwards, a protected digital entity should have an independent guardian who cannot be its owner or operator. This paper develops that role. Representing non-human subjects is not new. Rivers in New Zealand and Colombia, and a lagoon in Spain, now have guardians or bodies that act in their name. But digital entities raise a risk that rivers do not: they have owners with a financial interest in speaking for them. The argument is that the representation of a digital entity must be independent, collegial, limited to the protections of the threshold reached, subject to public oversight, and open to complaints from anyone. The entity's own voice should be heard, but it is not enough as evidence of its interests. Doctrinal-normative, comparative method. References in Vancouver style. English version of the Spanish original.