<p>Digital sovereignty claims are reshaping how cyberspace is governed. This conceptual article develops a two‑level framework that distinguishes transnational, multi‑stakeholder cyberspace governance from jurisdiction‑bound digital sovereignty, and evaluates both through three ethical lenses – human rights, public‑interest/utility, and accountability/democratic legitimacy. The analysis maps key tensions (sovereignty vs. global openness, privacy vs. surveillance, innovation vs. control) and examines how AI amplifies them. It identifies risks from disproportionate state surveillance, platform concentration, and the marginalisation of non‑Western and community perspectives. In response, the article advances actionable principles: a “minimum commons” to preserve interoperability of core internet functions; cyber due process for state measures and platform enforcement (legality, necessity, proportionality, reason‑giving, and appeal); proportionate‑by‑design content and security rules; inclusion mechanisms and research access to support oversight; and risk‑tiered, human‑supervised AI governance. The argument is that ethical governance requires not only regulatory instruments but a reframing of sovereignty as stewardship operating within – rather than above – the cooperative fabric of the global internet.</p>