Captain of an A320 refuses to accept Maintenance Release for his aircraft that was prepared in advance of the work having been performed.

Narrative

When I entered the flight deck a new release was still attached to the printer. As I sat in my seat; the mechanic came in to begin working on the inbound cabin discrepancies. More specifically; the video system. I asked him why I had a new release indicating that the required work had been done. He replied that he had just been assigned to the job and did not know why or who had sent the new release. I called ZZZ Maintenance and told them that I would not accept the release as valid and that I would require a new release after the work had been completed. I also told them that I considered the sending of the release prior to the work being completed was a violation of FARs. I was contacted by a Supervisor who told me that it was legal to send the release because no work was required. I then asked him why a mechanic was on the aircraft doing work required to comply with the MEL. He then stated that the video system was not safety related and; therefore; it was legal to send the release. I again reminded him that work was being done to comply with the MEL. The discussion continued and we respectfully agreed to disagree. I told him that I would be filing a report on this event and he had no issue with that. The work was completed and a new release was sent. As per the FOM; a new release is required after the completion of any work done on the aircraft. This is required by FAR. The MEL requires that Maintenance complete the following: 1) Ensure that all video screens are retracted; b) Pull (open) and safety video control CBs; 3) Install deferred decal. Logic; common sense and 30 years in the cockpit lead me to conclude that sending a release prior to the completion of the required Maintenance could potentially have serious consequences and is obviously not legal for that reason. I respectfully request an answer on the findings.