A central pillar of Mir’s legal strategy is the insistence on a public trial. The player has formally opposed the prosecution's request to hold sessions behind closed doors, arguing that there is no legal justification for it. His defence team believes that public scrutiny is essential to ensure a fair evaluation of the evidence and the testimonies provided by the accusers.
"Nothing justifies the development of the oral trial falling into the secrecy of being held behind closed doors. No reason is expressed by the petitioner for such a radical restriction to deprive public scrutiny of the reliability and sufficiency of the evidence proposed by the accusations in general and, very particularly, the testimony of the complainant, as presented by the accusations with the aim of upsetting the presumption of innocence of the accused," the statement read.