Diffuse administrative control was the subject of intense debate during the brief period in which it was in force in Peru. This paper aims to address the main concepts that led, initially, to authorize the public administration to exercise this power. The reason for this was to provide greater legal certainty to individuals by guaranteeing that their processes would be resolved under the protection of the constitution when a legal norm violated their fundamental rights. In addition, I seek to recount the different stages experienced by the diffuse administrative control in the judgment of the judges of the Constitutional Court TC; from its initial complete denial, through an increasingly perceptible acceptance until reaching the consolidation and subsequent rejection. Finally, we try to elucidate the questions that the last phase left regarding the questionable decision to leave without effect a binding precedent without proposing a new one to replace it; thus concluding, with a critical opinion of the authors that, in their own opinion, the final decision of the Constitutional Court in relation to the administrative diffuse control is considered irregular, almost arbitrary.