In Indonesia, the provision of in absentia in the Money Laundering Crime Law raises problems if the crime act is originally conventional crime act. Conventional crime act should be handled based on the provisions of the Indonesian Criminal Law Procedures Code. On the one hand, the Money Laundering Crime Law regulates the provisions of the court in absentia and, on the other hand, the Indonesian Criminal Law Procedures Code does not recognize trial in absentia. This study covers the issue. To be precise, it reveals the possibility of a conventional crime act that is charged with the Money Laundering Crime Law to be tried in absentia based on the principle of formal legality. In addition, it discusses the strategy of prosecution of money laundering crime act in trial in absentia for cases that are originally conventional crime act based on the principle of due process of law. This study used analytical description research specifications and the normative juridical method. The data was collected through a document study. In accordance with the approaches, the data were analyzed in qualitative-juridical manners. This study concludes several points. The first, based on the principle of legality of formal law, the implementation of trial in absentia against general criminal acts cannot be carried out. The second, based on the principle of due process of law, the prosecution strategy in trial in absentia fur such cases are that (1) the prosecution of money laundering crime and original crime must be done separately; (2) the public prosecutor must delay the transfer of original criminal acts to the court until the accused is found and presented; (3) the indictment must be prepared in a single form; (4) the indictment must draw legal facts about the original crime; and (5) the public prosecutor can prove the legal facts about the original crime in the element of ‘assets resulting from the crime’ in the money laundering offense.