My view is that the right to life, liberty and property are interwined, but property rights are entailments of a more general right of personal sovereignty. Property rights is not the first principle that personal sovereignty is derived from. Property rights are inherently constrained by personal sovereignty in the sense that in order for a property claim to be just it cannot violate the personal sovereignty of others (for an obvious example, one cannot rob someone at gunpoint in order to aquire property). Without this context of rights-respecting behavior being there in the first place, “property” claims are invalid.
So in this sense it’s really the other way around - property is not ethically valuable without individual sovereignty. Outside of the context of individual sovereignty, there are the property claims of tyrants, thieves and slavemasters. Property is not absolutely normatively “good” in and of itself, regaurdless of any context. Property rights (as the “good” manifestation of property) are entailments or applications of more fundamental right of personal sovereignty. A reasonable theory of property rights inherently involves some kind of qualification for ownership based on respecting people’s sovereignty in the first place.