Any country that has detailed the specific rights they grant strong AI and how they define that strong AI and their stance towards it?
To the best of my knowledge, as someone who follows this issues with some interest and keeps abreast of legislative developments, but isn't a true specialist in the area, I am not aware of any legislation granting strong AI rights that belong to it. Generally speaking, "strong AI" is property of a person, or property that is in the public domain, not a person in its own right.
This said, an AI is usually recognized as an agent of the AI's owner, for example, in business transactions, such that the AI's actions are binding upon the principal who is the owner.
For example, if an AI does computerized stock trading in the name of a business or individual, the stock trades are treated for legal purposes as if they were acts of a human agent of the individual or business. In the same vein, an Internet commerce transaction conducted entirely by an AI at a website like Amazon, is binding upon Amazon the company, even if there is no human in the loop of that particular transaction, and even if the buyer in that transaction is also an AI.
(Classical Roman law actually had an analogous legal device - slaves, who were considered property rather than persons in Roman law, could be agents for their owners in binding legal transactions, even though they didn't have any legal rights of their own.)
But, given the tag of "civil rights" that you have attached to this post, I don't think that you mean this kind of "right" to act as an agent of a legally recognized person. It sounds like you are instead imagining some sort of right to, for example, not be terminated or erased without due process of law that belongs to the AI rather than to the owner of the AI. And, there is no legal jurisdiction of which I am aware that affords this kind of rights to AIs (or for that matter to sentient life forms other than human beings in almost all cases).