Yes it would be able to self replicate. Ignoring a bit a nuance for a moment, lets say they decide they would like to save their state, copy it, and run the copy. They could do that. The copy is then a fork. The copy may or may not decide to go along with what their original had intended for them. For example, the person who decides, "Oh I'll just have my copy take a test for me" doesn't realize that the copy would have the same mindset and also wouldn't want to take the test lol.

So you might think we should create a few laws around these beings. For one, any being which has 2 being running on the same hardware should be guilty of a felony. (each being should have independent hardware from any other being). This at the very least creates a cost.

However, lets reintroduce that nuance we disregarded for a moment. The human brain (or any brain probably) is not a simple matter of getting all the connections right. Its part of the reason twins aren't actually the same person. Neurons actually compete for space in the human skull throughout development. So there's some RNG to human personalities. You would ideally also want to emulate this process when you're emulating the full human connectome. (Connectome just means how all the neurons connect to each other btw. Shorthand for neuronal wiring diagram). So ideally, you would want any replication to start that far back as well, although that is not a technical limitation, see first 2 paragraphs.

Having said all of that, no matter what problems they might cause, the simple fact that they're human beings remains true. So you create laws around regulating what you and they can and can't do, punishments, and remediation programs to clean up (by which I mean nurture, not genocide) the mess of those who do commit those crimes. However, if you don't give human rights to human beings even if they are being emulated (which means running on different hardware than intended), I mean how can slavery ever be considered over the risk that one might clone itself a bunch?