I said before that it is necessary to define justice before actually discussing or theorizing about applications or manifestations of it. I gave a two-fold, even paradoxical, definition for justice in a previous comment. The definition covered two aspects of justice- retribution (punishment or reward) and restoration (reconstruction and equality). To define justice with one of the aspects at the expense of the other is only a half definition; and subsequently to apply only one of these forms of justice to a given situation is half justice, or incomplete justice, and may even, logically, lead to non-justice or injustice.
God's justice is always complete. He punishes or rewards when it is required and necessary; but he doesn't end there. He then restores. Perhaps this illustration would help: Let's say that in a relatively stable and clean neighborhood stands one house or building that is ridiculously ugly, falling apart, and is covered with graffitti; to top it off, one can not see the widows because the grass, that is older than you, is in the way. Worst of all, the house is so completely exhausted with its condition that it is ready to fall. This house is an abomination to the neighborhood, and according to the "broken-window theory," this house's presence will attract more corruption that would eventually affect the whole neighboorhood. What is the best thing to do? The stains of this house's depravity, so to speak, has made it impossible to be reformed in that condition! "Let us destroy," says one, "and bring this disgraceful house to ruins!" So it happens. The house is destroyed for its disgrace and for the violation of the neighborhood's code of real estate values. Retribution, or punishment, was executed and satisfied the community who indirectly fell victim to the building's shame. Shouts of joy followed by the clapping of the crowds encouraged the city officials to bow in their grattitude for the honor. The only problem? There is a pile of rubble. Furthermore, lets say for some unexplainable reason, the buildings in this community had a tendency to become degraded; some slowly, some quickly. Eventually, due to this form of justice, the whole neighborhood would be demolished.
Throughout the Bible, namely the OT, we see that God is engaged in justice. He does punish (sorry Mennonites and extreme Liberals); this is clear. But he doesn't just leave the house destroyed. In his love and compassion, as well as in his creativity, he rebuilds! That is, he restores, not to the old condition but with a better one; one that is free and has a purpose for this neighborhood. This is God's justice- deconstructing subjects of corruption because of their corruption, in the light of divine law; and reconstructing them into objects of love and grace, who in turn will function as subjects reflecting the same type of justice.
The state has been faithful to its calling for justice (retribution), for God has definitely set them in place for that reason. Government is a part and result of human nature as a consequence to civilization. I don't doubt that. But I believe that the church, as restored individuals and as a reconstructed community, should be faithful to our calling of justice, namely, restoration. We must counterbalance society's concept of justice in order to make it fully justice, at the same time keeping an eye for their misuse of retribution, for there is a tendency for the state to abuse this privelege. The state is responsible to apply the dirty work of retribution, which they would do gladly since they don't understand the grace of restoration. But the church is responsible to apply to those who need restoration, which, spiritually, is everyone, but, socially, it's those who have suffered the consequences of errors- whether it's imprisonment or poverty as a result of many factors. We don't need another institution that is primarily focused on punishment, the state is enough. What our society needs is to understand and experience the other aspect of justice which, like God, has been forgotten.